Marine Corps Planning Process

U.S. Marine Corps

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

PCN 143 000068 00

MCWP 5-10

UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS

10 August 2020

FOREWORD

Marine Corps Warfighting Publication (MCWP) 5-10, Marine Corps Planning Process, was first

published in January 2000 as MCWP 5-1. Since that time, Marine Corps forces at all echelons of

command have used the Marine Corps Planning Process (MCPP) to conduct the range of military

operations. The use of design over the last decade suggests that design is more than conceptual

planning which establishes aims, objectives, and intentions.

A more critical role of design is to promote understanding of the current situation as a basis for

broad solutions. While design establishes the nature of the problem, the inclusion of a design

methodology in this revision aids commanders, staffs, and planners in determining the problem set

and a framework for solving them. The publication’s design methodology reflects a belief that

sufficient complexity can exist at all levels of warfare and across the conflict continuum to include

tactical situations that will require an understanding of the set of problems that hinder movement

from the current state to the desired state of an operational environment.

Among all critical factors bearing on military operations, time is defining. The MCPP helps

Marines win the time fight through a promotion of intuitive understanding, commander’s intent,

and the use of task and purpose when operating inside an established paradigm. Another time aid

is the center of gravity techniques used to determine which of the actions that address a problem

set will be decisive. These visions of decisiveness inform the convergence of combat power

through main and supporting efforts and resource priorities.

The publication focuses primarily on commanders with staffs; however, any Marine required to

plan operations should know the planning process well enough to determine the problem, envision

a desired state, and develop options for achieving that state.

This publication supersedes MCWP 5-10, Marine Corps Planning Process, dated 24 August 2010.

MCWP 5-10 implements North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Standardization Agreement

(STANAG) 2014, NATO Formats for Orders and Designation of Timing, Locations, and

Boundaries.

Reviewed and approved this date.

CARLOS O. URBINA

Colonel, U.S. Marine Corps

Director, Command Element – Information Warfare Division

Publication Control Number: 143 000068 00

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

MARINE CORPS PLANNING

ROCESS

TABLE OF

ONTENTS

CHAPTER 1. PLANNING OVERVIEW

Doctrinal Underpinnings .............................................................................................................. 2

Synopsis of the Marine Corps Planning Process ......................................................................... 4

Tenets of the Marine Corps Planning Process ............................................................................ 5

CHAPTER 2. PROBLEM FRAMING

Design ...................................................................................................................................... 10

Introduction to Marine Corps Design Methodology .................................................................... 11

Commander’s Operational Approach ........................................................................................ 16

Issue the Warning Order ........................................................................................................... 18

Staff Actions .............................................................................................................................. 20

Considerations .......................................................................................................................... 28

CHAPTER 3. COURSE OF ACTION DEVELOPMENT

Develop Courses of Action ........................................................................................................ 30

Course of Action Development Brief ......................................................................................... 34

Commander’s Wargaming Guidance and Evaluation Criteria .................................................... 34

Considerations .......................................................................................................................... 35

CHAPTER 4. COURSE OF ACTION WAR GAME

War Game Preparations ........................................................................................................... 37

War Game Techniques ............................................................................................................. 38

Conduct of the War Game ........................................................................................................ 39

Recording the War Game ......................................................................................................... 41

Refine Staff Estimates, Estimates of Supportability, and Supporting Concepts ......................... 42

Prepare Course of Action War Game Brief ................................................................................ 43

Commander’s Comparison and Decision Guidance .................................................................. 43

Considerations .......................................................................................................................... 43

CHAPTER 5. COURSE OF ACTION COMPARISON AND DECISION

Prepare Course of Action Comparison and Decision Products .................................................. 45

Course of Action Comparison and Decision Discussion ............................................................ 46

Commander’s Decision ............................................................................................................. 46

Update the Warning Order ........................................................................................................ 46

Considerations .......................................................................................................................... 46

iv MCWP 5-10

CHAPTER 6. ORDERS DEVELOPMENT

Refine the Concept of Operations ............................................................................................. 50

Prepare the Order or Plan ......................................................................................................... 50

Orders Reconciliation ................................................................................................................ 51

Orders Crosswalk ..................................................................................................................... 51

Approve the Order or Plan ........................................................................................................ 51

Considerations .......................................................................................................................... 51

CHAPTER 7. TRANSITION

Transition Preparation ............................................................................................................... 54

Transition Events ...................................................................................................................... 54

Transition Components ............................................................................................................. 55

Confirmation Briefs ................................................................................................................... 55

APPENDICES

A Marine Corps Planning in Joint Operations ......................................................................... 57

B Organization for Planning .................................................................................................... 59

C Marine Corps Planning Process Diagrams ......................................................................... 65

D Marine Corps Planning Process Tools ................................................................................ 69

E Design: An Example ............................................................................................................ 93

F Staff Estimates and Estimates of Supportability .................................................................. 95

G Red Team ........................................................................................................................... 99

H Rapid Response Planning Process ................................................................................... 105

I Interagency/Interorganizational Coordination .................................................................... 117

J Basic Operation Plan, Operation Order, and Attachments ................................................. 119

GLOSSARY

REFERENCES

CHAPTER

PLANNING

VERVIEW

Planning is the art and science of envisioning a desired future and laying out effective

ways of bringing it about.

—Marine Corps Doctrinal Publication (MCDP) 5, Planning

MCDP 5, Planning, describes planning as an essential part of the broader field of command and

control. Command and control enhances the commander’s ability to make sound and timely

decisions. Effective decision-making requires both the situational understanding to recognize the

essence of a given problem and the creative ability to devise a practical solution. Hence, an essential

function of planning is to promote understanding of the problem—the difference between existing

and desired conditions—and to devise ways to solve it. Planning involves elements of both art and

science, combining analysis and calculation with intuition, inspiration, and creativity. The Marine

Corps employs several planning processes:

 Troop Leading Steps. There are six steps that align with the acronym BAMCIS—begin

planning, arrange for reconnaissance, make reconnaissance, complete the plan, issue the order,

and supervise. While these steps have wide applicability, they are generally used by small unit

leaders who lack a staff.

 Marine Corps Planning Process. For Marine units with staffs, the Marine Corps Planning

Process (MCPP), as described in this publication, is a proven, intellectually rigorous approach

to planning. It is a six-step process comprised of problem framing, course of action (COA)

development, COA war game, COA comparison and decision, orders development, and

transition. See figure 1-1.

 Joint Planning Process. Marine Corps forces also operate in a joint environment. Joint force

commanders and their staffs use joint planning process, as described by Joint Publication (JP)

5-0, Joint Planning, for strategic plans and operational-level campaigns. Marine air-ground

task force (MAGTF) command elements, which may serve as or interact with a joint force

headquarters, must be capable of operating effectively within a joint planning process

framework.

 Rapid Response Planning Process. Used primarily by Marine expeditionary units (MEUs),

the rapid response planning process (R2P2) is a time-leveraged planning process that enables a

MEU to begin execution of an assigned task within 6 hours. To do so, MEUs conduct the

deliberate planning—within the context of the intended area of responsibility—as well as the

rehearsal of potential missions, such as humanitarian assistance/disaster relief or noncombatant

evacuation operations, during pre-deployment training. Accordingly, the R2P2, when coupled

with the extensive use of standing operating procedures (SOPs), enables a MEU to focus its

execution planning on those aspects of a problem unique to the current situation.

MCWP 5-10

Figure 1-1. Overview of the Marine Corps Planning Process.

DOCTRINAL UNDERPINNINGS

Planning should never be viewed as an isolated activity or process. Not only is planning a critical

element of command and control, but planning along with execution and assessment comprise the

operation’s process. Planning is the basis for execution while assessment determines how and why

the environment has changed as a result of execution, which then informs subsequent planning and

assessment. While that description suggests a sequence to the relationship, these three essential

military activities are cyclical in nature. Individually and together, they interact and evolve over

time through countless, interrelated events.

Because situations change continuously, Marines make decisions in the face of relative uncertainty.

While it is natural to seek additional information to lessen that uncertainty, it usually comes at the

expense of time. Success in a fluid environment demands Marines to think critically, examine the

nature of the problem, as well as the purpose of the operation, and learn and adapt throughout the

entire operation’s process.

Many factors within the operational environment, some of which cannot be controlled, contribute

to making planning endeavors complex and nonlinear. These factors include: enemy actions; the

actions of other actors and stakeholders; other friendly, neutral, and threat networks; updated

intelligence; changing resources; revised guidance from higher headquarters (HHQ); input

provided as a result of operations; and concurrent planning by subordinate, adjacent, and

supporting units. Planners and commanders should expect problems to evolve even while they try

to solve them.

While this publication presents the six steps of the MCPP sequentially, planning seldom occurs in

a straightforward, linear manner. For example, understanding gained during COA development

and COA war game steps will often require planners to revisit the problem framing step of the

Marine Corps Planning Process

planning process. To better appreciate the lack of a rigid, fixed planning sequence, planners need

to understand the planning hierarchy that is essential to the effective application of the MCPP.

As described in MCDP 5, conceptual planning is the highest level of planning. It establishes aims,

objectives, and intentions and involves the development of broad concepts for action. In general,

conceptual planning is a process of creative synthesis supported by analysis. It generally

corresponds to the art of war. Developing tactical, operational, or strategic concepts for the overall

conduct of military actions is conceptual planning.

At the lowest level of the hierarchy is detailed planning, which is concerned with translating the

broad concept into a complete and realistic plan. Detailed planning flows from conceptual planning

and generally corresponds to the science of war and encompasses the specifics of implementation.

Detailed planning generally is an analytical process of decomposing concepts into executable

tasks, although it likely involves some elements of synthesis as well. Detailed planning works out

the scheduling, coordination, or technical issues involved with moving, sustaining, administering,

and directing military forces. Examples of detailed planning include load plans and air tasking

orders. Unlike conceptual planning, detailed planning does not involve the establishment of

objectives. Detailed planning works out actions to accomplish the objectives.

Between the highest and lowest levels of the hierarchy is functional planning, which involves

elements of both conceptual and detailed planning. Functional planning is concerned with

developing and integrating the supporting plans for discrete functional activities that include at a

minimum maneuver, fires, logistics, intelligence, information, and force protection.

Normally, due to the importance of conceptual planning, the commander directs the formulation

of plans at this level. While the commander is also engaged in both functional and detailed

planning, the specific aspects of these are usually developed by the planners and staff.

Conceptual planning provides the basis for all subsequent planning and should progress from the

general to the specific. For example, the commander’s operational approach leads to the unit’s

concept of operations (CONOPS) as well as to supporting functional concepts. These concepts then

lead to the specifics of execution.

The planning dynamic does not operate in only one direction. Conceptual planning must be

responsive to functional constraints. For example, the realities of deployment schedules (a

functional concern) can dictate employment schemes (a conceptual concern). Functional planning

in turn must be responsive to more detailed requirements of execution. In this way, the levels of

planning influence each other. Conceptual, functional, and detailed planning are seldom conducted

sequentially because the situation and available information are continually evolving. While

conceptual, functional, and detailed planning are described in sequence, in practice they are

conducted in a more interactive manner due to uncertainty and time.

MCWP 5-10

SYNOPSIS OF THE MARINE CORPS PLANNING PROCESS

A commander may begin planning on his/her own initiative, based on indications and warnings,

or in response to specific guidance and direction from HHQ. The planning process is designed to

promote understanding among the commander, planners, staff, and subordinate commanders

regarding the nature of a given problem and the options for solving it. The plans that result may

be considered hypotheses that will be tested and refined as a result of execution and assessment.

The six steps of the MCPP are—

 Problem Framing. Problem framing uses a design methodology supported by staff actions to

enhance the understanding of the operational environment and the subsequent problem set.

Problem framing identifies what the command must accomplish, when and where it must be

done and, most importantly, why—the purpose of the operation. The mission statement

articulates the “in order to,” the ultimate purpose of the operation. The commander’s intent

restates and amplifies the purpose of the operation, which is enduring. No amount of subsequent

planning can solve a problem that is misidentified and/or insufficiently understood. It is

imperative that commanders identify and solve the correct problem. Therefore, problem

framing is the most important step in planning. The understanding that results from problem

framing allows the commander to visualize and describe how the operation may unfold, which

is articulated in the commander’s operational approach, a broad framework for solving the

problems identified. As planning continues, the commander’s guidance becomes more detailed,

providing additional clarity and operational context.

 COA Development. The COA development step produces options for accomplishing the

mission in accordance with commander’s operational approach. It provides options for the

During the Korean War, General MacArthur succinctly restated his campaign concept in

his Far East Message to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, “Operation planned mid-September is

amphibious landing of a two-division corps in rear of enemy lines for purpose of

enveloping and destroying enemy forces in conjunction with attack from south by Eighth

Army.” Guided by this design, his staff planned multiple COAs. This planning revealed

that the most strategically advantageous COA - an amphibious assault at Inchon - also

involved the greatest operational risks. General MacArthur accepted the risks of landing at

Inchon and subsequent staff actions focused on the functional and detailed planning

necessary to both flesh out the COA and minimize attendant risks. The latter included using

a discarded COA, a landing at Kunsan, as the basis for a deception effort.

In 1864 and 1865, General Grant’s strategic concept called for coordinated military actions

in Virginia, Georgia, and Tennessee. These actions were complemented by a naval

blockade and put overwhelming pressure on all of the Confederate armies, thereby

removing their ability to shift resources to reinforce any one army.

Marine Corps Planning Process

commander and promotes further understanding of the environment, problem set, and the

approach to solving the problem.

 COA War Game. This step seeks to improve the COA by testing and stressing it against an

enemy and/or adversary, or other forms of friction in operations such as humanitarian

assistance, in the operational environment. Planners identify and record flaws for correction in

the refined COA. Done well, COA wargaming improves COAs while enhancing a better

understanding of the environment, the problem set, and the forces (both friendly and

adversarial) involved. Planners evaluate refined COAs using the commander’s chosen criteria.

 COA Comparison and Decision. During COA comparison and decision, the commander

reviews the advantages and disadvantages of the options. The commander decides how to

accomplish the mission, either by approving a COA as formulated or by assimilating what has

been learned into a new COA that may need further refinement and wargaming.

 Orders Development. The orders development step translates the commander’s decision into

oral, written, and graphic direction sufficient to guide subordinate planning, execution, and

initiative.

 Transition. The transition step may involve a wide range of briefs, drills, or rehearsals

necessary to ensure a successful shift of situational awareness from planning to execution.

Transition addresses the human element. The written order is initially well-understood only

by the small group that wrote it. Transition enables the far larger group of executors (current

operations staff, subordinate unit commanders and staff, combat operations center members,

etc.) to comprehensively understand the plan. A number of factors can influence the transition

step, such as echelon of command, mission complexity, and most importantly, time available.

Throughout the planning process, commanders and planners must strive to increase their

understanding of the problem set, the plan, and developments in the operational environment.

Lead planners must seek a common understanding across the staff, to include those not assigned

to the core planning team. Providing focused, preparatory readings for upcoming briefs to

commanders and primary staff officers, with sufficient time for comprehension, will better prepare

leaders and planners to engage in substantive discussions. Warning orders (WARNORDs) and

other focused communications greatly facilitate concurrent and parallel planning, while driving a

higher level of integration. Videos, graphics, and other modern media, used in all facets of

planning, briefs, and orders, can greatly enhance knowledge and understanding.

TENETS OF THE MARINE CORPS PLANNING PROCESS

The tenets of the MCPP—top-down planning, single-battle concept, and integrated planning—

derive from the doctrine of maneuver warfare. These tenets guide the commander’s use of the

staff to plan and execute military operations that include campaigns involving day-to-day

operations such as security cooperation activities and exercises.

MCWP 5-10

 Top-Down Planning. Planning is a fundamental responsibility of command. The commander

uses planning to increase his/her understanding of the environment, the problem set, and the

subsequent solution. The commander’s personal involvement is critical to successful,

centralized planning. The commander must not merely participate in planning, but must drive

the process to the degree that the published plan is a clear manifestation of the commander’s

decision regarding how to best accomplish the mission. In keeping with our institutional

warfighting philosophy, this commander-driven, centralized planning provides the necessary

foundation for decentralized execution, an important way Marine Corps forces leverage the

time-competitive nature of military operations to gain and maintain advantage relative to the

enemy/adversary.

 Single-Battle Concept. In planning, to maximize opportunities for success, commanders and

planners seek to purposely arrange forces in time, space, event, and purpose. Such

arrangements, to include phasing, main and supporting efforts, and the relationship among

decisive, shaping, and sustaining forces and activities, are well considered and never arbitrary.

During execution, events, activities, or operations in one part of the battlespace often have

profound and consequent effects in and on other areas and events. Commanders and planners

must, therefore, always view the battlespace as an indivisible entity—a single battle.

Commanders cultivate the single-battle mindset throughout planning, primarily through

articulated understanding of their higher commander’s purpose and their planning guidance and

intent. Global integration is now the norm for conducting operations, so commanders and staffs

must consider impacts beyond geographic boundaries that have traditionally bounded planning

considerations.

 Integrated Planning. Leveraging top-down planning and a keen appreciation for the MAGTF

single-battle concept, integrated planning seeks the coordination of actions by all elements of

the force toward a common purpose. There are both hierarchical and lateral perspectives to

planning integration. Hierarchically, the MAGTF command element integrates planning with

each of its subordinate elements, as well as its HHQ. Laterally, the MAGTF’s subordinate

elements integrate their planning with each other to generate synergy and to leverage the full

capacity and capability of the force. As Marine Corps forces fight as part of a larger force,

lateral integration with adjacent and supporting joint and combined forces is equally

important. Integrated planning results from the assignment of personnel to the operational

planning team (OPT), to include joint and combined force planners, who are armed with an

appropriate level of knowledge of their respective organization or functional activity. It will

also likely include the provision of Marine Corps planners to other joint and combined units.

The key to integrated planning is to involve the right personnel from the right organizations

as early as possible to consider a broader range of factors, reduce omissions, and share

information as widely as possible. See Appendix D for information on organizing for planning.

Overall, planning is a complex process of interacting activities with feedback loops. The six steps

of the MCPP aid in understanding and generally follow a sequence. However, planning is not a

simple sequence of steps. Any step in the process may inform previous steps. For example,

Marine Corps Planning Process

conceptualizing a COA generally follows establishing goals and objectives, but it is difficult to

establish meaningful goals and objectives without some idea of how to accomplish them. Another

example, new information received during orders development may reveal a weakness in the

CONOPS that would require the development of new COAs or a branch plan.

MCWP 5-10

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

CHAPTER

PROBLEM

RAMING

To comprehend and cope with our environment we develop mental patterns or

concepts of meaning . . . we cannot avoid this kind of activity if we intend to survive on

our own terms.

—John R. Boyd, Destruction and Creation

First, we didn’t know ourselves. We thought we were going into another Korean War,

but this was a different country. Secondly, we didn’t understand our Vietnamese

allies. We never understood them, and that was another surprise. And we knew even

less about North Vietnam. Who was Ho Chi Minh? Nobody really knew. So, until we

know the enemy and know our allies and know ourselves, we’d better keep out of this

dirty kind of business. It is very dangerous.

—General Maxwell Taylor, Vietnam: A History

Figure 2-1. Problem Framing Process.

Problem framing is the first step in the MCPP and consists of a commander-driven design

methodology supported by staff actions. It may begin informally in response to indications and

warnings or more formally when the HHQ produces an order or directive—including the HHQ

mission and tasks to subordinate commands. The purpose of problem framing is to gain an

enhanced understanding of the operational environment and the nature of the problem set. In the

information age, with the global and instantaneous reach of information capabilities, resources,

and activities, the problem set will result from a consideration of all relevant actors, motives,

capabilities, and actions that could impact the ability to accomplish assigned tasks. This greater

understanding of the operational environment allows a commander to visualize the operation and

describe his/her broad operational approach, providing context for the examination of what the

MCWP 5-10

command must accomplish, when and where it must be done, and most importantly, why—the

purpose of the operation. This higher level of understanding is especially useful in debunking

invalid assumptions, inaccurate stereotypes, and erroneous capability assessments. Particulary

important is to avoid mirror imaging, which is assuming other people or groups would react to a

given situation in the same way as you would. Since no amount of subsequent planning can solve

a problem insufficiently understood or misidentified, framing the problem is critical. To achieve

this understanding, problem framing requires both the judgment of synthesis and the systematic

study of analysis.

In problem framing, commanders and planners begin their appreciation of two enduring, critically

important factors—time and risk. This appreciation continues throughout all steps of planning and

every phase of execution.

Like people and equipment, time is a resource. Commanders and planners constantly deal with the

impact of time throughout planning and execution, and those who fail to appreciate it endanger the

integration and coordination within the force necessary for success. As its impact is pervasive, it

is not an exaggeration to say that of all the critical factors in military operations, the aspect of time

is defining. While clearly not a complete list, examples of the importance of time include—

• Allocating available time for planning, to include allocating time for subordinate units.

• Calculating the time required for the movement of forces to ensure forces are arrayed spatially

to achieve the desired outcomes.

• Determining how long it takes to do something, to include how weather and other

environmental conditions, day and night, impact that duration.

• How long staff review and approval processes take in advance of a commander’s decision that

directs tactical actions in a specific area.

While commanders and planners appreciate time, commanders own risk. As MCDP 1,

Warfighting, states, “Risk is inherent in war and is involved in every mission….Risk may be

related to gain; greater potential gain requires greater risk.” An appreciation for risk, therefore,

enables the commander to make more informed decisions regarding the employment of forces.

Where risk management programs in garrison rightfully focus on mitigation and preservation of

warfighting capabilities, risk in war and competitions short of armed conflict also include the need

to leverage—even embrace—risk in order to gain and maintain advantage relative to an enemy

and/or adversary.

DESIGN

A design methodology, as outlined in figure 2-1, is central to the problem framing effort. The goal

of design is to achieve understanding gained largely through critical thinking and dialogue—the

basic mechanisms of design. The ability to address complex problems lies in the power of

organizational learning through design. Group dialogue, when conducted within the proper

command climate, can foster a collective level of understanding not attainable by any individual

Marine Corps Planning Process

within the group. While design occurs throughout problem framing, design is an enduring activity

not confined to the problem framing step.

INTRODUCTION TO MARINE CORPS DESIGN METHODOLOGY

The Marine Corps design methodology helps planners determine the correct set of problems, and

a framework for solving them. In this manner, design not only occurs throughout problem framing

but throughout all of planning and execution. The design methodology consists of four distinct

actions—

1. Describe the current and desired states of the operational environment.

2. Define the problem set.

3. Produce the operational approach.

4. Reframe throughout planning and execution.

Within the Marine Corps, design can play a meaningful role in virtually every planning evolution,

regardless of scope or complexity. Additionally, the Marine Corps views design beginning during

problem framing that further emphasizes the need for design in every instance where planning

occurs, even though the amount of design effort will be different for each situation.

The Marine Corps design methodology reflects a belief that sufficient complexity can exist at all

levels of warfare and across the conflict continuum to include tactical situations that will require

an understanding of the set of problems that hinder movement from the current state to the desired

state of an operational environment. These problems may be simpler to identify than a more

complex joint operation, but the requirement still exists. The Marine Corps design methodology is

flexible enough to add value in all of these instances. Figure 2-1 summarizes this methodology

and appendix E provides an example of design.

Commander’s Orientation

The commander’s orientation is the initial action by the commander in the design effort to begin to

frame the problem as a basis for developing possible solutions. It demonstrates the commander’s

personal involvement and leadership in the planning process, and allows the commander to set the

tone for subsequent planning. The commander’s orientation is the first of many venues where the

commander, planners, staff, and subordinate commanders collaborate through discourse, the

exchange of information, and the sharing of ideas and perspectives.

The commander’s orientation could be as simple as the commander’s initial thoughts or it may be

as complex as the commander’s experience and detailed analysis allow. For example, Operations

Desert Shield and Desert Storm did little to prepare I Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF) for Joint

Task Force Los Angeles (Los Angeles Riots) and Joint Task Force Somalia (Operation Restore

Hope), which represented entirely different circumstances, actors, and operational environments.

In both cases, other than succinct planning directives to prepare for possible operations, there was

little initial information besides what could be gleaned from media outlets. In contrast, multiple

tours in Iraq and Afghanistan enabled commanders to provide a wealth of information to initiate

MCWP 5-10

their planning efforts. The commander will base the orientation on a study of the operational

environment that includes friendly and enemy forces, competitors, and other forms of friction

depending on the nature of the situation, such as terrain and weather impacts on operations. Another

critical factor is the information environment, that is defined as the aggregate of individuals,

organizations, and systems that collect, process, disseminate, or act on information. The

information environment includes space, cyberspace, as well as domestic and international

audiences.

In a mature situation with existing HHQ’s plans, the commander can provide higher’s intent and

may even suggest possible centers of gravity (COGs) and the commander’s intent for the

command’s subordinate forces. The degree to which the commander has, or can gain, an in-depth

understanding of the situation will go a long way toward helping the OPT determine both the

current and desired states of the operational environment.

Describe the Current and Desired States of the Operational Environment

Planners describe the current and desired states of the operational environment (see fig. 2-2). The

current state is the status of the operational environment as it presently exists. The desired state is

a hypothesis of more favorable conditions at a future time. Some desired states might be a simple

transition from one part of an operation to another, or a clear subset of the HHQ’s desired end

state. Other desired states at higher-level commands could include transition criteria that cease

hostilities altogether.

Figure 2-2. Current State to Desired State.

Marine Corps Planning Process

Planners use graphics and a narrative to best describe the current and desired states. This technique

enhances the understanding of the operational environment for practitioners and provides a clear,

concise, and familiar way to portray information to a commander.

The type of graphics and narratives depend on the complexity of the operation and how each

commander best assimilates information. For instance, a MEF- or Marine expeditionary brigade

(MEB)-level operation may describe the current and desired states across the six common

operational variables—political, military, economic, social, information, and infrastructure,

(PMESII). Areas, structures, capabilities, organizations, people, and events (ASCOPE) is another

example that highlights civil variables that planners can use in conjunction with the operational

variables to gain a more holistic understanding of the operational environment.

Other options may be a systems diagram (see fig. 2-3) or a causal loop diagram (see fig. 2-4) to

describe relationships between and among a variety of factors and stakeholders.

Figure 2-3. System Diagram Example.

A causal loop diagram aids in visualizing how different variables in a system are interrelated (see

fig. 2-4). The diagram consists of a set of nodes that represent the variables and edges that represent

a connection or a relation between the two or more variables. A link marked positive (+) indicates

a positive relation and a link marked negative (–) indicates a negative relation. A positive causal

link means the two nodes change in the same direction. Meaning, if the node in which the link

starts decreases, the other node also decreases, or if the node in which the link starts increases, the

other node increases as well. A negative causal link means the two nodes change in opposite

directions. If the node in which the link starts increases, the other node decreases and vice versa.

In the causal loop diagram, closed cycles are very important features that are defined as either a

reinforcing loop or balancing feedback loop. A reinforcing loop is a cycle in which the effect of a

MCWP 5-10

variation in any variable propagates through the loop and returns to the variable reinforcing the

initial deviation. For example, if a variable increases in a reinforcing loop the effect through the

cycle will return an increase to the same variable. A balancing loop is the cycle in which the effect

of a variation in any variable propagates through the loop and returns to the variable a deviation

opposite to the initial one. For example, if a variable increases in a balancing loop the effect

through the cycle will return a decrease to the same variable.

Figure 2-4. Causal Loop Diagram Example.

Define the Problem Set

Informed by the work to determine the current and desired states, planners define the problem set.

The problem set is a list of reasons that can prevent the shift of the current state to the desired state

(see figs. 2-5 and 2-6). Joint and other Service doctrine refer to the development of a “problem

statement” within design. Problem statements are usually constrained to a single sentence and can

oversimplify the challenges within the operational environment. It is unlikely that the design

methodology will expose a single problem to solve. In reality, when engaging complex systems,

many problems will emerge. The key is to identify relevant problems, examine relationships

among them, and then package the understanding into a problem set that is representative of the

operational environment and informative to the planning process.

Marine Corps Planning Process

Figure 2-5. Problem Set.

Figure 2-6. Problem Set Example.

Similar to the descriptions of the current and desired states in the previous step, Marines can

categorize and describe the problem set in a number of ways. The MAGTF command elements

may wish to use the operational variables PMESII and/or ASCOPE, for example, to categorize the

problem set. Another option is expressing the problem set by friendly, neutral, and threat networks.

MCWP 5-10

Other elements of the MAGTF may find a categorization of problems across warfighting functions

to be more useful. Staffs within regiments, groups, battalions, and squadrons may prefer a simple

brainstorming activity to itemize a list of problems that the staff determines are most relevant.

With a defined problem set, planners should brief the commander on the design results. This event

will help guide subsequent planning. It will also allow for an early opportunity to revisit design if

the commander does not agree with the problem set.

The problem set informs the mission statement developed later in problem framing. By that, the

mission statement must address the problem set. If the mission statement does not, planners should

revisit design and the task analysis that informed the mission statement. If the results remain the

same, the planners should consult HHQ for clarification of assigned tasks. The rigor that a staff

puts into the design effort will help to illuminate and provide evidence for why the assigned tasks

may not address the problem set.

The development of the problem set also influences COG analysis, described later in this chapter.

The relationships identified between various actors during the analysis of the current and desired

states can illuminate possible friendly, enemy, and adversary COGs. Moreover, while a problem

set rightfully identifies the need for simultaneity and concurrent operations using, for example,

multiple lines of effort and/or operations, COG analysis helps the commander and staff determine

what is most important among all the required actions. In this manner, COG analysis can help

planners envision decisive actions as a basis for main effort designations and the convergence of

combat power to seek a decision.

COMMANDER’S OPERATIONAL APPROACH

The commander’s operational approach concludes the initial iteration of problem framing. The

operational approach is broad, overarching guidance that the commander conveys through the

commander’s intent and COA development guidance. The operational approach requires the input

and synthesis of both design and the staff actions.

The operational approach is an expression of what the commander intends to accomplish and how

it will be done using available resources. This visualization reflects the commander’s

understanding of the situation and his/her hypothesis for achieving the overall purpose. Put another

way, the better the commander understands the situation and problem set, the more self-evident

the solution.

Commander’s Intent

Commander’s intent is a clear and concise expression of the purpose of the operation and the

desired military end state that supports mission command, provides focus to the staff, and helps

subordinate and supporting commanders act to achieve the commander’s desired results without

further orders, even when the operation does not unfold as planned. (DOD Dictionary) The desired

state or conditions may relate to terrain-based requirements as well as the disposition of friendly,

enemy, adversary, and/or civil elements. While end state conditions may change, the commander’s

Marine Corps Planning Process

intent endures to the point that the purpose is the most critical aspect of planning any and all

military operations.

Commander’s intent helps subordinates understand the larger context of their actions and guides

them in the absence of orders. It allows subordinates to exercise judgment and initiative—when

the task assigned is no longer appropriate given the current situation—in a way that is consistent

with the higher commander’s aims. This freedom of action, within the framework of the

commander’s intent, creates tempo during planning and execution. Higher and subordinate

commanders’ intents must align. The purpose of the operation derives from the “in order to…”

portion of the mission statement or the execution paragraph of the higher commander’s operation

plan (OPLAN) or operation order (OPORD).

The commander may develop his/her intent early in the planning process, but will review and

revise it as required. As the commander proceeds through the planning process, additional levels

of understanding about the environment and the problem are gained that allow the commander to

formulate and refine the intent as well as the vision of actions.

Course of Action Development Guidance

Based on a variety of considerations, such as available time or understanding of the problem and

its complexity, the COA development guidance may be narrow and directive or it may be broad

and inquisitive. The former may include development of a single COA, while the latter may direct

exploration of several COAs. Specific guidance can be in terms of warfighting functions, line of

or types of operations, or forms of maneuver. It may also include the commander’s vision of

decisive, shaping, and sustaining actions (which assist the staff in determining the main effort);

parts of the operation; location of critical events; and other aspects the commander deems pertinent

to COA development.

 Decisive Actions. Decisive actions are those the commander deems fundamental to achieving

mission success. Decisive actions can occur in multiple domains and throughout the

battlespace. They cause a favorable change in the situation or cause the enemy/adversary to

change or cease planned/current activities. For an action to be decisive, it must lead directly to

a larger success. Decisive actions create an environment in which the enemy/adversary has lost

either the means or the will to resist. The unit envisioned to be conducting the decisive action

is normally identified as the main effort.

 Shaping Actions. Shaping sets conditions for decisive actions. Shaping actions are

interactions with selected elements within the battlespace to influence an enemy’s capabilities,

force, or the enemy commander’s decision-making process. The commander may shape the

battlespace by protecting friendly critical vulnerabilities and attacking enemy critical

vulnerabilities. Shaping actions do not need to wait for physical forces to deploy from home

station; they could include an information campaign supported by the enterprise. Shaping can

incorporate a wide array of functions and capabilities and is more than fires and targeting. It

may also include engaging friendly, neutral, and threat networks through the use of operations

in the information environment (also referred to as OIE), security cooperation, engineer

MCWP 5-10

activities, civil affairs, civil-military operations, and counter threat finance. When faced with

an armed hostile threat, shaping actions can make the enemy vulnerable to attack, impede or

divert their attempts to maneuver, aid friendly maneuver, and influence the decision-making

of key actors to achieve information superiority. When not involved in armed conflict, shaping

can help enable the accomplishment of the mission. For example, if conducting a

counternarcotic mission in support of the US Drug Enforcement Agency, a key leader

engagement with US and other partners can help both sides understand the mission, limitations

(i.e., restraints and constraints), thus preventing or limiting friction and enabling the mission.

Shaping can dictate the time and place for decisive actions. It forces the enemy to adopt COAs

favorable to the friendly force commander’s plans. The commander attempts to shape events

in a way that allows for several options to achieving the decisive action.

 Sustaining Actions. Sustaining actions are shaping actions directed at friendly forces.

Planning is a sustaining action. It prepares friendly forces for military operations by improving

their understanding, which minimizes shock or surprise and promotes intuitive decision-

making to enhance tempo. Other examples of sustaining actions include information

preservation and resiliency actions, preventative medical services and logistic operations, such

as stockpiling critical ammunition, fuel, and supplies to facilitate future operations.

Additionally, COA development guidance may include—

 Minimum number of COAs to be developed.

 Enemy/adversary vulnerabilities.

 Types of operations.

 Forms of maneuver.

 Actions to influence the cognitive dimension.

 Selection and employment of the main effort.

 Reserve.

 Communication strategy and operations (COMMSTRAT).

 Command relationships.

 Task organization.

 Risk guidance.

 Further restraints and/or constraints.

 Arrangement of the operation (phasing).

 Timing of the operation.

ISSUE THE WARNING ORDER

Upon completion of problem framing, the commander directs the release of a WARNORD, which

allows subordinate commands to begin concurrent planning as the higher command begins COA

development. The WARNORD should emphasize critical information, but also contain all relevant

information to facilitate concurrent planning. Due dates for planning products and transition

events, as well as known or possible movement and execution dates, must be communicated early

Marine Corps Planning Process

in planning. Consistency with formats used for subsequent orders products will help speed the

information flow because subordinates will know where to look for critical information. When

operating with coalition and partner nation forces, WARNORDs should reflect language and

cultural considerations.

Reframe Throughout Planning and Execution

Reframing occurs when the commander, planners, and the staff revise their understanding of the

environment and problem set. If required, they develop a new approach to overcome the challenges

or to leverage opportunities that precipitated the need to reframe (see fig. 2-7). Reasons for

reframing can include—

 Changes in the original problem set.

 Significant changes in the enemy composition.

 Significant changes in the expected enemy approach.

 Significant changes in friendly capabilities.

 HHQ policy changes or directives that change the desired state.

 Lack of friendly progress toward objectives.

 Shifts in international support or domestic will.

 Key assumptions prove to be invalid.

Figure 2-7. Reframing.

Note that the actions associated with the design methodology first occur during problem framing.

However, this does not mean design is a singular effort that concludes after the first step of

planning. In reality, commanders and their staffs should routinely reexamine the results of their

design efforts during planning and throughout execution because significant changes to the

operational environment will occur. The problem set that derives from design will change as the

current and desired states evolve. Ultimately, the reframing challenge for commanders and

MCWP 5-10

planners is to determine when a plan is no longer a basis for action. Through fragmentary orders

(FRAGOs), planners routinely maintain the viability of a plan. However, at some point with

enough change in the environment, the commander will need to reconvene the OPT for a complete

design reset.

STAFF ACTIONS

Design does not occur in isolation; much of the information available to the commander comes

from staff actions. Accordingly, staff actions are concurrent and complementary—vice

sequential—activities that underwrite the design effort. These complementary activities are of little

value unless they interact. The planning process provides venues for interactions between the

commander, OPT, staff, and subordinate units. When the staff or OPT briefs the commander, they

are providing, in part, the results of their actions. When the commander provides guidance, his/her

direction represents a synthesis of the staff’s input, along with other sources of information, which

manifest in the form of a decision about how to proceed. All of the following actions enhance

understanding and increase planning effectiveness largely through their contribution to the design

methodology.

Task Analysis

Task analysis may occur in two stages. Initially, any known tasks provided by HHQ will heavily

influence the environmental frame. As planning continues and understanding improves, planners

can use the problem set as a basis for determining among the specified and implied tasks which

are the more essential to mission success. Commands normally receive tasks that planners analyze

as a basis for determining the unit’s mission. The principal source for tasks is the HHQ plan or

order. There may be other sources, such as verbal guidance from the HHQ or unit commander,

from which to derive tasks. Additionally, as the problem and purpose are understood as a result of

the design effort, the command develops tasks from the problem set.

Design and Task Analysis

Design establishes paradigms whereas task analysis is paradigm accepting. Within an accepted

or established paradigm, commanders armed with task and purpose can proceed to task

analysis as a basis for COA development.

With the need to reframe due to the constantly changing operational environment, the currently

understood paradigm—typically described in the “Situation” paragraph—will evolve to the

point that the existing plan—to include any FRAGOs—will no longer serve as a basis for

action. A subsequent design effort seeks to provide an updated framework within which tasks

(and purpose) to subordinate units can more directly lead to viable solutions.

Marine Corps Planning Process

 Specified tasks derive primarily from the execution paragraphs of the HHQ OPORD, but they

may be found elsewhere, such as in the mission statement, coordinating instructions, annexes,

and FRAGOs. Specified tasks may also derive from verbal instructions from the commander

or the HHQ commander. Planners should identify and record any specified task that pertains

to any element of the unit. As a general rule, each specified task will quote the stated task and

cite the source (e.g., specific paragraph of the HHQ OPORD).

 Planners infer implied tasks which are necessary to accomplish specified tasks. Implied tasks

are those most challenging to identify. They entail those actions required within the context of

the mission but are neither stated nor part of a SOP or routine continuing action. Planners

discover them through an inductive process of rigorous analysis of all specified tasks,

commander’s guidance, assumptions, COG analysis, doctrine, case studies, intelligence

preparation of the battlespace (IPB) products, and the experience or expertise of subject matter

experts (SMEs), partners, allies, and other relevant human resources. A good example is global

integration that necessitates considering tasks that may not be accomplished with organic

forces with existing authorities. Similar to requesting joint sorties for additonal capacity,

unique capabilities, or shaping areas beyond the MAGTF area of operations, commanders will

need to coordinate for expanded information capabilities to the force or support from external

forces with necessary authorities and or capabilities.

 Essential tasks are the specified or implied tasks that a force must perform in order to

accomplish their mission. Typically the mission statement, developed later in problem framing,

includes all essential tasks. However, a commander may consider listing a single essential task

to promote a focused effort toward the most decisive action. Otherwise, a mission statement

that contains a sequenced list of essential tasks could start to look a lot like a CONOPS, thus

putting focus at risk.

Center of Gravity Analysis

However conducted, COG analysis is a means to focus the commander and staff on what is most

important—during a particular time or event—among all the variables and factors that can

influence the conduct of operations.

Relative Combat Power Assessment

Relative combat power assessment (RCPA), which includes emerging capabilities never

considered before—such as cyberspace units—provides planners with an understanding of

friendly and enemy forces’ strengths and weaknesses relative to each other. To assess relative

combat power, planners generally analyze force ratios two levels below the planning unit. For

example, division planners will compare numbers, readiness, etc. of friendly and enemy battalions

(infantry, artillery, etc.). The RCPA provides insight on the types of operations possible for

friendly and enemy forces, weaknesses, and additional resources that may be required.

While force ratios may be important, the numerical comparison of personnel and major end items

is one factor among many, such as leadership, morale, equipment maintenance, training levels,

MCWP 5-10

and the effects of weather. Planners present RCPA conclusions and key findings during the

problem framing brief.

Assumptions

Assumptions are suppositions about the current situation or about future events assumed to be true

in the absence of facts in order to continue planning and allow the commander to make a decision

concerning a COA. They apply to friendly, neutral, and enemy/adversary situations as well as the

environment. Assumptions must answer the following:

 Is it logical?

 Is it realistic?

 Is it essential for planning to continue?

 Does it assume away an enemy/adversary capability?

Subsequent planning will identify new assumptions while confirming or disproving prior

assumptions. Planners should keep a record of all assumptions and their resolution. Operation

plans can and will likely contain assumptions; but OPORDs should not. Unresolved assumptions

carried into execution become a risk to operations.

Where appropriate, planners forward assumptions to HHQ for validation. This ensures that the

HHQ commander understands the potential risks that a subordinate command is accepting. It may

prompt the HHQ to pursue facts that support the assumption or to request additional information.

Planning Limitations

Restraints (what cannot be done) and constraints (what must be done) that do not qualify as

specified tasks require identification. Planners often find restraints and constraints in the rules of

engagement, commander’s guidance, and instructions from higher headquarters. Planners then

must address these limitations during COA development and subsequent planning as they affect

the conduct of operations.

Develop the Mission Statement

The mission statement is a solution-based expression of the problem set. The purpose of the

operation and the essential tasks, as identified in task analysis, are the foundation for the mission.

A properly constructed mission statement answers the following questions:

 Who (forces that will conduct the operation)?

 What (essential task or tasks [e.g., destroy] and, as necessary, type of operation [e.g., “conducts

air assault and seizes …”]?

 When (time or event that determines when an operation will start and/or end)?

 Where (location)?

 Why (purpose of the operation)?

Marine Corps Planning Process

The commander approves the proposed mission statement, modifies it, or develops a new mission

statement as a prelude to COA development. The approved mission statement becomes the

foundation of an OPLAN or OPORD.

Intelligence Preparation of the Battlespace

The OPT develops and refines IPB products, to include enemy COAs. The IPB products must

mature and evolve as planning progresses. For example, as the OPT works through problem

framing, COA development, and COA war game, they may conduct pattern analysis of enemy

actions—as well as the activities of local inhabitants—to better understand the operational

environment. This pattern analysis feeds the development of various templates. These templates

will help populate the decision support template (DST), which will include named areas of interest

(NAIs), target areas of interest (TAIs), and decision points.

Green Cell Activities

At a minimum, the green cell provides for the independent wills and needs of the various groups

or neutral networks that may affect the MAGTF’s operations. The green cell may also provide

considerations for non-Department of Defense (DOD) entities, such as private sector or

nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Green cell composition can range from an individual to

a task-organized group of SMEs that may include liaisons from the local populace and non-DOD

agencies. For more information related to green cell activities, see JP 3-25, Countering Threat

Networks, Marine Corps Warfighting Publication (MCWP) 3-03, Stability Operations, and Marine

Corps Tactical Publication (MCTP) 3-02A MAGTF Network Engagement Activities.

Red Cell Activities

The red cell “employs” enemy/adversary forces to help the commander assess friendly COAs. A

red cell can range in size from an intelligence officer to a task-organized group of SMEs. While a

red cell’s principal duties center on COA development and the COA war game, it participates in

the analysis of COGs and also supports the commander’s understanding of the problem during the

initial stages of design. Determining which enemy/adversary forces and echelons on which to

focus is an important decision of the red cell. As planning continues, the red cell develops its own

enemy/adversary mission, intent, and COAs in accordance with the enemy’s doctrine, history,

goals, and IPB. The red cell is different than a red team.

Red Team

Red team, or in capability terms, red teaming is a broadly applicable resource that supports the

inclusion of independent, critical thought, and alternative perspectives to help facilitate problem-

solving and decision-making processes, to include planning. In addition to support to planning,

red teams can fully explore alternatives in operations, concepts, organizations, and capabilities

within the context of the operational environment. See Appendix G, Red Team, for a detailed

discussion about how the red team supports each step of the planning process.

MCWP 5-10

Staff Estimates

Staff estimates provide key information (e.g., facts, assumptions, asset locations and availability,

forecasted shortages) that will increase the commander’s understanding and aid decision-making.

Staff estimates depict how each staff section or warfighting function supports each COA. The staff

estimates also list, in prioritized order, the key concerns and issues (e.g., availability of a particular

port or airfield) of the associated staff officer. Staff estimates must clearly differentiate between

concerns and problems that can be resolved through subsequent staff coordination, and any that

require the commander’s personal intervention.

Estimates of Supportability

Estimates of supportability are similar to staff estimates. The subordinate units provide focused

accounts of unit readiness and associated dates, concurrent tasks and commitments, strengths,

locations, shortages, deployment status, and other key concerns. Estimates of supportability are

especially important for attached or supporting units, so commanders and planners can better

envision employment options. These estimates should provide a timely examination of factors that

support decision-making and identify significant aspects of the situation that can influence the

COA and affect mission accomplishment. A running estimate that favors content over format and

may be either a formal, detailed written document or an informal verbal briefing. For example, if

the staff or subordinate unit is aware of a COA will have a negative impact on mission

accomplishment, there is no need to complete a formal document or wait until the next planning

milestone meeting.

Operational Environment

The operational environment is a composite of the conditions, circumstances, and influences that

affect the employment of capabilities and bear on the decisions of the commander. In the 2010

timeframe, JP 3-0 introduced the term operational environment to encourage a more thorough

examination of the battlespace. Understanding friendly and enemy forces is not enough; other

Red Team vs. Red Cell

What red teams and red cells share in common—through an adversarial, contrarian

approach—is the ability to expose plans to rigorous examination thereby

improving an organization’s adaptability to a constantly changing environment.

But they differ in a number of ways. Red cells are a key OPT element from problem

framing through COA war game. Red cell membership will vary by the nature of

the threat whether an established nation-state military force or a non-state

competitor. In contrast, red team members are school trained (0506 MOS) special

staff reporting to the chief of staff. Where the red cell is integral to the OPT, red

teams are an independent capability providing external support to planning efforts

in addition to other command concepts, ideas, and processes.

Marine Corps Planning Process

factors, such as culture, language, tribal affiliations, and the human and information environments,

can be equally important. Essentially, commanders analyze the operational environment in order

to determine the physical dimensions of their battlespace in the form of areas of interest, influence,

and operations.

Battlespace Refinement

Battlespace is environment, factors, and conditions that are studied and a resource Marines use to

accomplish the mission while protecting the force. Battlespace includes the area of interest, area

of influence, and operational areas. Operational areas for MAGTFs are usually an area of

operations. The size, shape, and duration of the battlespace can directly influence the staff’s

assessment of the current state during problem framing. As planning continues, the staff may

recommend battlespace refinements based on the analysis of the terrain and tasks as well as

friendly and enemy COGs, capabilities, and limitations.

Resource Shortfalls

Based on the tasks, possible solutions, and available resources, planners and staff identify critical

resource shortfalls which can include a need for SMEs, authorities (or agencies with those

authorities), and maneuver forces that can create effects within global areas of interest.

Operation Assessment

Assessment is an inherent staff action that each member of a command performs in their respective

functional area. If a command determines the need to further organize to the assessment

requirement via a cell and/or some other entity like an assessment working group, the commander

will either need external augmentation or source the personnel organically, since there are no

assessment cells in any standing MAGTFs.

Ideally, an assessment cell, if sourced, will form with the onset of planning. With the hierarchical

layering of tasks and intents, military planning provides a natural framework for assessment. While

the commander will eventually need to provide the assessment cell’s focus, the cell’s default role

at the beginning of planning typically is to shadow the planning effort looking for the more

subjective aspects of the plan that will require the cell’s attention.

The essential goal of an assessment cell is to explain the command’s progress toward a desired

state. In design terms, an assessment cell will update its environmental frame via measures of

performance and measures of effectiveness. The difference between the desired state and the ever-

changing current state is the basis for assessment reporting. To explain why the unit is progressing

or not, the assessment cell must interact with sufficient battle rhythm events and other sources of

information to obtain the feedback necessary to inform a rational narrative that may include

recommendations for change. See MCDP 6, Command and Control, discussion “What is the

Relationship Between ‘Command’ and ‘Control’?” concerning the role of feedback as the

mechanism that allows commanders to adapt to changing circumstances.

MCWP 5-10

This publication does not contain an assessment process, since commanders assimilate information

uniquely in their own way. Each mission is also unique to the command’s understanding. For

collection and reporting examples that can aid in developing a commander-friendly assessment

process, see Marine Corps Reference Publication (MCRP) 5-10.1, Multiservice Tactics,

Techniques, and Procedures for Operation Assessment.

Commander’s Critical Information Requirements

Commander’s critical information requirements (CCIRs) link to decisions. The staff may propose

and will continually review and update CCIRs, which fall into two categories—priority

intelligence requirements (PIRs) and friendly force information requirements (FFIRs). The PIRs

are key components of the IPB process and the collections plan.

Each CCIR asks a question that, when answered, assists the commander in making a key decision.

As planning continues, planners identify and list likely decisions associated with each CCIR.

Planners then create branch plans that facilitate the timely execution of the decisions tied to CCIRs.

Commander’s Significant Notification Events

Where CCIRs link to decisions, commander’s significant notification events (CSNEs) identify the

need for more information based on the presumption that CSNEs will incur a high demand for

information from the chain of command as well as the media. The CSNEs are serious incidents,

acts, or allegations that require the commander’s immediate notification.

Requests for Information

Planners identify requirements for information to remove assumptions, support future plans, or

conduct current operations. Based on the initial IPB and information requirements (including

CCIRs), the commander and OPT identify gaps in information and intelligence. Planners forward

requests for information (RFIs) to the appropriate staff section or to HHQ for answers. Policy

questions or other complex topics are better suited for other venues, such as commander-to-

commander discussions, for resolution. Over time, the number of RFIs can make the tracking effort

very difficult. Therefore, RFI management tools and a RFI manager are essential to track all RFI

submissions and responses.

Problem Framing Brief

The OPT presents a problem framing brief to the commander to review the completed products

and to ensure a shared understanding across the staff. When approved by the commander, these

products inform COA development. The brief may include the following:

 List of specific decisions, approvals, and guidance requested of the commander during the

brief (e.g., decision on whether to request an area of operations change from HHQ, approval

of proposed CCIRs).

 Situation update (status of friendly forces, stakeholders, and existing command relations;

significant events in the area of operations and area(s) of interest).

Marine Corps Planning Process

 Problem set review.

 IPB update.

 Intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) collections (current and planned).

 HHQ missions (one and two levels up).

 HHQ commanders’ intents (one and two levels up).

 Task analysis (specified, implied, and essential tasks listed in prioritized or sequential order).

 COG analyses (friendly, enemy).

 Assumptions.

 Limitations (restraints and constraints).

 Red cell summary.

 Green cell summary.

 Staff estimates.

 Estimates of supportability.

 Recommended battlespace refinement.

 Resource shortfalls (prioritized).

 Lessons learned summary.

 Risk.

 Draft CCIRs.

 Draft CSNEs.

 RFIs (current RFIs and recently answered RFIs, prioritized).

 Draft liaison plan.

 Planning and execution timeline.

 Other updated products from ongoing activities.

 Proposed mission statement.

 Operational approach discussion.

o Commander’s intent.

o COA development guidance.

Both the brief and the work generating the products can influence the commander’s understanding

of the environment and the problem set. Accordingly, the commander may use this opportunity to

refine the commander’s intent and guidance or modify the mission statement.

The commander generally concludes the brief by approving the mission statement and releasing a

WARNORD. A critical output of problem framing is also a discussion of the broad operational

approach. With the commander’s intent, this broad operational approach forms a basis for the

commander’s COA development guidance and better postures planners for the detailed planning

that follows. The commander may also want to further consider the problem framing products, as

well as any additional information that emerged during the brief, before approving the products or

providing additional guidance.

MCWP 5-10

CONSIDERATIONS

No amount of critical thinking will ensure complete understanding of a problem set. Accordingly,

design does not end with problem framing. The commander must continually return to his/her

understanding of the problem, refine the guidance, and provide an update or even a new vision and

description as the planners and staff work through the planning process.

The staff actions on the preceding pages provide a broad framework for an open-ended dialogue

with no predetermined conclusion during the command’s efforts to gain an understanding of the

operational environment and the problem set. The problem framing brief or any other planning-

related brief has an intrinsic value far beyond the information presented. Whenever the

commander, OPT, staff, and subordinate commanders and their staffs share a common venue

where dialogue takes place, learning and awareness improve. Group dialogue, when conducted

within the proper command climate, can foster a collective level of understanding not attainable

by any individual within the group regardless of experience or seniority. Group interactions

involving frank and candid input are the best way to replicate the nonlinear nature of conflicts and

the parties involved.

CHAPTER

COURSE OF ACTION

EVELOPMENT

Decision-making requires both the situational awareness to recognize the essence of

a given problem and the creative ability to devise a practical solution.

—MCDP 1,

Warfighting

. . . make plans to fit circumstances, but do not try to create circumstances to fit plans.

—General George S. Patton, Jr., War As I Knew

Course of action development leads to one or more options for accomplishing the mission in

accordance with the commander’s operational approach that resulted from the design effort that

began during problem framing. For options to be distinguishable, each COA must employ different

means or methods that address the essential tasks and incorporate the commander’s operational

approach.

During COA development, planners use the products carried forward from problem framing to

generate options—COAs—that satisfy the mission in accordance with the commander’s

operational approach. Developed COAs should be—

 Suitable: Does the COA accomplish the purpose and tasks? Does it comply with the

commander’s guidance?

 Feasible: Does the COA accomplish the mission within the available time, space, and

resources? Is the unit(s) capable of executing this COA?

 Acceptable: Is the COA worth the cost in personnel, casualties, equipment, materiel, time,

and/or position? Is it consistent with the law of war and is it militarily and politically

supportable?

 Distinguishable: Does the COA differ from other COAs?

 Complete: Does the COA address all of the tasks? Does it address the entire mission (main

and supporting efforts, reserve, associated risks, and all applicable warfighting functions)?

Does the COA contain sufficient detail for COA war game?

Planners develop COAs to give the commander options for how to be successful. The commander

may direct a single COA if his/her understanding of the situation and problem set makes a single

COA self-evident or if operating under severe time constraints.

When developing COAs, planners consider two fundamental questions:

 What needs to be accomplished?

 How should it be done?

Answering the second question is the essence of COA development. The following staff actions

assist COA development:

MCWP 5-10

 Update IPB Products. Intelligence preparation of the battlespace enables planners to view the

battlespace in terms of the enemy/adversary and the environment. It helps planners determine

how the enemy/adversary will react to proposed friendly COAs, the purpose of

enemy/adversary actions, the most likely and most dangerous enemy/adversary COAs, and the

type of friendly operations that the terrain, weather, and infrastructure will allow. It is critical

that planners continue to update and refine IPB to deepen their understanding of the situation

and to answer the two fundamental questions posed in COA development.

 Display Friendly Forces. The graphic display of friendly forces in relation to the terrain

allows planners to see the current and projected locations of friendly forces and can help reveal

possible options.

 Refine COG Analysis. The commander and planners refine COG analysis based on updated

intelligence and IPB products, initial staff estimates, and input from the red and green cells.

The refined COGs and critical vulnerabilities suggest ways to interact with selected elements

in the battlespace.

 Refine CCIRs. With the approved CCIRs, planners begin to link individual PIRs and FFIRs

to specific decisions. The refined CCIRs also include related branch plans and sequels for each

decision. As it is updated and refined throughout the MCPP, the CCIR list helps prepare the

commander for possible key decisions required in execution and also prepares the staff and

unit(s) for timely execution of or changes to the plan.

 Continue Red and Green Cell Planning. Red and green cells prepare to play the roles of key

enemy/adversary or civilian leaders during COA war game. During COA development, the red

cell builds and refines enemy/adversary COAs, using the enemy/adversary COAs in IPB as its

starting point. As planning continues, the red cell provides updates and findings for IPB

refinement. The red cell researches the tendencies, biographies, and/or histories of opposing

force commanders and units, and refines its plan accordingly. The red cell also articulates the

enemy/adversary commander’s anticipated knowledge of friendly intentions and plans. The

red cell must have enemy/adversary COAs completed in sufficient detail for wargaming by the

end of COA development. The green cell identifies and details the initiatives, events, and

important dates of populations or organizations that may affect friendly or enemy/adversary

operations. The green cell also develops the consequent reactions of civilian groups to friendly

and enemy/adversary actions.

 Update Staff Estimates. Staff estimates assist planners during COA development by

providing essential information on areas of concern, identifying requirements and capabilities,

determining shortfalls, and identifying potential solutions to those shortfalls.

 Continue Operation Assessment Planning. Planners, in conjunction with an assessment cell

if formed, will develop an overall operation assessment framework.

DEVELOP COURSES OF ACTION

Guided primarily by the commander’s COA development guidance, along with the planning

products created in problem framing, planners begin developing possible ways, or options, to

Marine Corps Planning Process

accomplish the mission. This development requires critical thinking skills and unbiased, open-

minded participants. The number of COAs and level of detail depend on the commander’s

guidance and the time available for planning. Planners should not judge or eliminate initial or

“rough-cut” COAs; planners record all possibilities for consideration to provide the commander

with a variety of distinct options.

There are numerous techniques for developing COAs. Some commanders envision a sequence of

actions given goals and objectives in accordance with design; others consider key factors, such as

RCPA, a useful starting point; and others focus on ways to counter the enemy’s/adversary’s most

dangerous and most likely COAs. Regardless of the specific COA development technique used,

planners should consider the following factors:

 Battlespace Framework. The framework allows the commander to relate the forces to one

another in time, space, and purpose. Deep, close, and rear areas, as described in MCDP 1-0,

Marine Corps Operations, are a common framework for conventional operations.

 Array of Forces. Friendly, enemy/adversary, and, when relevant, populations should be

arrayed in the same venue while developing COAs.

 Purpose and Tasks. Identify the purpose for each subordinate element. Purposes are often

friendly-related, and generally either accomplish the mission or support the main effort. After

identifying the purpose of a subordinate element, identify the task that best accomplishes the

purpose. Begin with the main effort and follow with the supporting effort(s) and reserve, if

assigned.

 Task Organization. Task organization accounts for all units (e.g., organic, attached,

supporting, headquarters elements). The task organization should reflect each unit’s construct,

size, and resources such as main or supporting effort and priorities for lift, fires, and resupply.

Task organization identifies commanders, clarifies command relationships, and accounts for

span of control.

 Sequencing. Planners determine the best arrangement of actions to accomplish the mission.

This arrangement is often a combination of simultaneous and sequential actions. Although

simultaneous actions may be ideal, resource availability may require the commander to

prioritize and sequence actions.

 Phasing. If necessary, commanders may divide plans and operations into phases. Phases

represent distinct periods in the progress of the overall operation. Phasing may require

conditions to transition to the next phase. Planners identify the criteria, decisions, and

authorities associated with transitioning to each phase. Phases can be subdivided into two or

more stages, stages into two or more parts, and parts into two or more steps. To avoid confusion,

planners should nest their phasing plan within the HHQ plan.

 Integration. The OPT depicts the integration of actions across time and space in the COA

graphic and narrative as well as the synchronization matrix.

MCWP 5-10

 Control Measures. Control measures (e.g., maneuver control measures, fire support

coordination measures, airspace coordination areas) should expedite actions and ensure forces

have sufficient battlespace and flexibility to accomplish their tasks while protecting their

forces.

 Focus on the Problem(s). Friendly COAs, in accordance with the mission statement and

commander’s intent, are designed to address the problem(s) identified during problem framing.

Initial Courses of Action Brief

The commander reviews the initial COAs to see if they meet his/her intent. Normally, an informal

review, referred to as a rough-cut COA brief, that the staff conducts as soon as possible once the

planners have drafted initial COAs. This brief saves time by avoiding refinements to COAs that

the commander will not approve or select. The review also helps the commander further refine

his/her understanding and begin to see tangible results of his/her intent. The commander may

eliminate COAs, direct modifications to the initial COAs, or may direct the development of

additional COAs.

Completed Course of Action Requirements

Using the commander’s guidance and a review of the initial COAs, the staff further develops,

expands, and refines the COAs to be taken forward into COA wargaming. A complete COA

normally consists of a COA graphic and narrative, task organization, synchronization matrix, and

supporting concepts. As applicable, COAs also include a draft assessment plan. Additionally, the

staff may recommend to the commander how a COA should be wargamed and evaluated. This

recommendation may include the war game method and which enemy/adversary COA to use.

Course of Action Graphic and Narrative

The COA graphic and narrative portray how the organization will accomplish the mission.

Together, the graphic and narrative identify who (notional task organization), when, what (tasks),

where, how, and why (intent). The COA graphic and narrative are essential and inseparable.

Together, they help the commander, subordinate commanders, and the staffs understand the

method by which the organization intends to accomplish the mission. During conventional

operations, the graphic portrays the locations and activities of the main and supporting efforts,

reserve, command posts, critical maneuver control measures (e.g., objectives, boundaries, phase

lines), and fire support coordination measures (e.g., coordinated fire line, no-fire areas). The

narrative provides the purpose and tasks of the main and supporting efforts, the reserve, significant

operations that cannot be depicted on the graphic (e.g., certain aspects of operations in the

information environment), as well as the timing and sequencing of the operation. See Appendix D

for additional examples of COA graphics and narratives.

In other types of operations, such as those supporting competition below armed conflict, the

graphic may display civil-military activities, critical information nodes and infrastructure,

locations of relief organizations and dislocated civilians, demographic variations (tribal, ethnic,

Marine Corps Planning Process

religious patterns) of the population, key infrastructure, and culturally or historically significant

areas.The COA graphic and narrative, when approved by the commander, form the basis for the

CONOPS and operations overlay in the OPLAN or OPORD.

Task Organization

The task organization captures how the commander intends to structure the force to accomplish

the mission. It also establishes command and support relationships. Proper task organization

portrays each unit’s structure, size, and equipment to support the commander’s CONOPS. Planners

must depict all units (e.g., organic, attached, supporting), including headquarters elements, in the

task organization. Span of control considerations and command relationships are important aspects

of task organization.

Synchronization Matrix

The synchronization matrix is a working document showing the activities of the command and

subordinate elements over time. It displays how units, warfighting functions, and tasks interrelate

throughout all phases, providing additional details (e.g., displacement of the command post,

priorities and location of the reserve element, information integration specifics, sequencing of

tasks and movements) that complement and amplify the COA graphic and narrative. The purpose

of a synchronization matrix is to relate forces and their actions to one another in time, space, and

purpose, and converge combat power and military information power to achieve a decision or

advantage. A synchronization matrix should not overly script the actions of subordinate units as if

to create an expectation that planners can accurately predict precise unit dispositions days far in

advance. If a plan is too tightly coupled, it is easily damaged, difficult to repair, and lacks the

flexibility to address the inherent friction and uncertainty of war. During orders development, the

completed synchronization matrix enables planners to assign tasks to subordinates. See Appendix

D for additional examples of synchronization matrices.

Supporting Concepts

The staff prepares supporting, functional concepts for each COA to integrate and coordinate

actions into a single, cohesive plan. The staff estimates evolve into supporting concepts.

Supporting concepts may be organized by warfighting functions, as well as select activities

requiring separate supporting concepts (e.g., operations in the information environment). Once the

commander selects a COA, the supporting concepts inform the corresponding portions of the

OPORD. For example, within the OPORD logistics is outlined in paragraph 4, “Administration

and Logistics,” and discussed in detail in Annex D (Logistics/Combat Service Support); and

communications is oulined in paragraph 5, “Command and Signal,” and discussed in detail in

Annex K (Combat Information Systems).

MCWP 5-10

COURSE OF ACTION DEVELOPMENT BRIEF

Planners brief each COA separately. Standardized formats help focus the brief and prevent the

omission of essential information. The COA development brief may include the following:

 List of specific decisions, approvals, and guidance requested of the commander during the brief

(e.g., approval of proposed CCIR changes, select COAs for wargaming, COA wargaming

method selected, COA evaluation criteria confirmed, etc.).

 Situation update (status of friendly forces, stakeholders, and existing command relations,

significant events in the area of operations and area(s) of interest, etc.).

 IPB update.

 ISR collections update.

 Red and green cell update.

 RFI update.

 CCIR recommended changes.

 Operation assessment plan update.

 For each COA:

o Task organization.

o COA graphic and narrative.

o Synchronization matrix (referenced, as necessary).

o Supporting concepts.

 Recommended COA wargaming guidance (see below).

 Recommended COA evaluation criteria (see below).

COMMANDER’S WARGAMING GUIDANCE AND EVALUATION CRITERIA

Following the COA development brief, the commander will select or modify the COAs for

wargaming and provide wargaming guidance and evaluation criteria.

The commander’s wargaming guidance may include a list of friendly COAs for wargaming against

specific enemy/adversary COAs. For example, COA 1 will be wargamed against the

enemy’s/adversary’s most likely COA, whereas COA 2 will be wargamed against both the

enemy’s/adversary’s most likely COA and most dangerous COA. Wargaming guidance may also

include priorities, wargaming method, refining the phasing or sequencing of an operation, and a

list of critical events requiring greater analysis, such as a river crossing.

Before the planners begin the COA war game, the commander must choose the evaluation criteria

that will be used to select the COA that will become the CONOPS. The commander establishes

evaluation criteria based on judgment, personal experience, and the overall understanding of the

situation and problem. The COA evaluation criteria focuses the wargaming effort and provides the

framework for data collection by the OPT and staff. The commander will use the data collected in

wargaming during the COA comparison and decision step. The COA evaluation criteria may

include—

 Warfighting functions.

Marine Corps Planning Process

 Principles of war.

 Limitation on casualties.

 Exploitation of enemy weaknesses/friendly strengths.

 Defeat of the enemy’s COG.

 Protection of the friendly COG.

 Degree of asymmetrical operations.

 Operations in the information environment

 Risk.

 Earliest date and time the operation can begin.

 Duration of the operation.

 Political considerations.

 Impact on local population and/or issues.

CONSIDERATIONS

A COA must contain sufficient detail to facilitate COA wargaming. The war game, if done

properly, will usually reveal flaws and omissions in each COA. Planners often must resume COA

development during wargaming, not because their COAs are infeasible, but because the COAs are

incomplete and require additional detail to continue the war game.

The COA development process continues to inform the commander and the staff and leads to

products that drive subsequent steps in the MCPP. The updated commander’s visualization

resulting from COA development, can include a possible reframing of the problem and purpose.

In this manner, the COA development brief provides another venue for further design discussion.

MCWP 5-10

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

CHAPTER

COURSE OF ACTION WAR

AME

Know the enemy and know yourself; in a hundred battles you will never be in peril.

When you are ignorant of the enemy but know yourself, your chances of winning or

losing are equal. If ignorant both of your enemy and of yourself, you are certain in

every battle to be in peril.

—Sun Tzu, The Art of War

The purpose of COA wargaming is to improve the plan. War games enable commanders and

planners to: (1) validate the COAs, by testing each COA against an enemy/adversary with an

independent will or a competitor during operations below the threshold of armed conflict, under

realistic environmental conditions; (2) improve each COA and the overall plan, including

necessary branches or sequels; (3) evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each COA; and (4)

better understand the problem and environment. A COA war game prepares commanders,

planners, and staffs for the challenges, opportunities, and decisions inherent in execution.

Whether conducted formally as a disciplined, interactive process or informally through a “what if”

conversation between the commander and staff, wargaming relies heavily on the operational

judgment and experience of the participants. Computer-aided modeling and simulation

applications provide other methods for wargaming.

Planners war game friendly COAs against selected enemy/adversary COAs through an iterative

action-reaction-counteraction process. On larger staffs, a red cell creates and fights

enemy/adversary COAs, while a green cell develops probable responses and actions of the

population and other groups. This form of interaction coupled with feedback loops accounts for

the nonlinear nature of military operations.

War Game Preparations

War Game Billets

In addition to those personnel involved throughout the planning process, a facilitator, arbiter, and

recorder, who are intimately familiar with the plan, are assigned to war game the COA(s).

 Facilitator. Often the lead planner, the facilitator:

o Ensures that the war game effectively tests the COAs, in accordance with the

commander’s wargaming guidance.

o Prioritizes the wargaming focus, in accordance with the commander’s wargaming

guidance.

o Ensures the data and findings are properly recorded.

o Meets the planning and execution timeline requirements.

MCWP 5-10

 Arbiter. The arbiter determines the outcomes of turns (i.e., action, reaction, and counteraction),

assesses casualties (friendly, enemy, and adversary personnel, as well as civilians) and losses

(e.g., military materiel and facilities, civil facilities and infrastructure), and adjudicates

disagreements. Though an independent view is preferred, the facilitator could also serve as the

arbiter.

 Recorder. The recorder captures all relevant data and findings (e.g., updates to the

synchronization matrix, recommended modifications to a COA’s task organization, input to

the COA evaluation worksheet) as directed by the lead planner.

Documents and Tools

Requirements to conduct a COA war game include:

 Approved mission statement.

 Commander’s intent and guidance.

 Commander’s wargaming guidance.

 IPB documents.

 ISR plan.

 Friendly, complete COAs.

 Designated enemy/adversary COAs (including enemy/adversary ISR).

 Red cell supporting documents, when available, for each enemy/adversary COA.

 Green cell documents, when available.

 Operation assessment plan.

 RCPA (overall and at select locations identified for wargaming).

 Risk assessment.

 COG analysis (friendly, neutral, and enemy).

 CCIRs.

 COA war game rules.

 COA war game briefing sequence and requirements.

 Detailed timeline for the conduct of the COA war game.

 Map (paper or electronic) that includes the area of operations and area of influence with

control measures depicted.

 Military symbols for units and equipment (e.g., friendly, enemy, civilian).

 Casualty estimator tool.

 COA war game worksheet.

 COA evaluation worksheet.

War Game Techniques

Four standard wargaming techniques—key event or sequence of essential tasks, avenue in depth,

belt, and box—are available. Each technique is suited to a particular situation or type of command.

Marine Corps Planning Process

Commanders and planners may choose one, combine aspects of war game techniques, or create

new techniques to meet the commander’s overall wargaming requirements.

Key Event or Sequence of Essential Tasks

Wargaming a key event or essential tasks in sequence (if there is a sequence) allows the planners

to determine timing, support requirements, and how the accomplishment of a key event or essential

tasks predisposes success or accomplishment of subsequent tasks.

Avenue in Depth

Avenue in depth focuses on one avenue of approach at a time, beginning with the main effort. This

technique is good for offensive COAs or for defensive situations when canalizing terrain inhibits

mutual support.

Belt

Belts divide the terrain into segments that span the width of the sector (defense), zone (offense),

or area of operation. This technique is most effective in cross-compartment terrain, phased

operations, or when the enemy deploys in clearly defined echelons. A belt will normally include

more than one event. When time is short, the commander may use a modified belt technique, such

as noncontiguous belts selected on the basis of anticipated critical events, which may or may not

occur at the same time. At a minimum, belts should include the area of—

 Initial contact along the forward line of own troops, the line of departure/line of contact, or in

the security area.

 Initial penetration or initial contact along the forward edge of the battle area.

 Passage of the reserve or commitment of a counterattack.

 The objective (offense) or defeat of the enemy (defense), such as the limit of advance for the

counterattack.

Box

The box technique is a detailed analysis of a critical area, such as a colored landing beach, an

infiltration route, a river crossing operation, or a raid objective. It is most useful when time is

limited. This technique applies to all types of units. The OPT isolates the area and focuses on the

critical events within that area.

Conduct of the War Game

Prior to the execution of the war game, the facilitator leads a discussion that includes the following:

 War game purpose.

 Wargaming guidance.

 Review of friendly COAs.

 Review of enemy/competitor mission, intent, and COAs.

MCWP 5-10

 Order of events (e.g., COA 1 vs. most likely COA, then COA 2 vs. most dangerous COA).

 Detailed timeline for the conduct of the war game.

 Rules, including adjudication.

 Briefing sequence (initial and per turn) and requirements.

 Conduct of the war game details.

 Starting locations (friendly and enemy units and ISR assets, populations, etc.).

 Facilitator’s master scenario event list (MSEL).

 Recording methods.

 MCPP products requiring updates.

 Details regarding the future COA wargaming brief to the commander.

The COA war game itself consists of one or more turns. In most instances, a turn includes the

discussion of three steps, as described below: friendly action, anticipated reaction of

enemy/adversaries and the local population, and friendly counteraction. If the enemy/adversary is

on the offense or has the initiative during a turn, the turn may be modified to include four steps:

enemy/adversary action, friendly and civilian reaction, enemy/adversary counteraction, friendly

counteraction.

 Action. Friendly force commanders or their representatives during the COA war game describe

the operations of all forces involved during this event. They describe the force, mission, tasks,

and desired outcome. They annotate the force list to account for all forces employed in the

event, while moving icons on a map or electronic overlay if physical positioning is applicable.

If using a map or overlay, unit representatives need to provide markers for the relevant global

considerations that can impact a unit’s ability to achieve its desired state.

 Reaction. The red cell will react to friendly actions by briefing the enemy’s/adversary’s (or the

element that represents a threat to friendly success) actions according to its plan, and similarly

moving icons. The red cell commander describes the operations enemy/adversary forces are

currently executing as well as the employment of relevant forces outside the immediate area of

operations but within the area of interest during this event. Friendly wargamers can then

validate the portion of their plan or higher and adjacent plans that address these additional

enemy/adversary forces. The red cell and friendly commanders determine where they will have

contact. The red cell commander describes the locations and activities of the assets identified

as high-value targets (HVTs) and highlights points during the operation where these assets are

important to the enemy’s/adversary’s COA. If these points affect the friendly COA, friendly

wargamers identify the HVTs as high-payoff targets (HPTs), making their engagement an

integral part of the friendly COA. With this information, planners update the situation and event

templates to reflect tactical areas of interest that support the engagement of those HPTs.

 Civilian Reaction. The green cell will provide likely civilian responses to friendly and

enemy/adversary actions, as well as any relevant civilian initiatives. The OPT discusses the

impact of the contact on friendly and enemy/adversary forces and the population. Recording

tools capture the discussion. If the OPT members agree on the outcome, the game turn proceeds.

If they do not agree, the arbiter determines the outcome and the war game proceeds.

Marine Corps Planning Process

 Counteraction. The counteraction will require some degree of synthesis in order to respond to

the enemy/adversary’s actions. The war game facilitator determines the outcome, whether

failure, success, losses, or casualties, as a basis for the next turn. The war game continues until

the entire avenue of approach, belt(s), box, key event or sequence of essential tasks have been

thoroughly wargamed.

To examine and test the details of timelines, support requirements, combat power, etc., war games

generally depict and exercise units two levels down. For instance, MEF wargamers will represent

the wing and division commanders and include all aircraft groups and infantry regiments on their

force list as well as all separate battalions, such as the light armored reconnaissance battalion and

tank battalion. Because commanders frequently task-organize forces, wargamers should also list

the number of subordinate units in each element; for example, one regiment is currently operating

with two battalions, another with three. Similarly, the wargamer employing the aviation combat

element (ACE) would be expected to know the number of squadrons in each group (by type) and

the number of aircraft in each squadron.

A casualty estimator (software, paper, etc.) is useful for quickly assigning casualties and assisting

the arbiter in adjudicating battle outcomes.

Facilitators create beforehand and use a MSEL consisting of plausible war- and mission-related

events, acts, crises, etc. that could occur during the operation and can be used to test the overall

plan. During wargaming turns, the facilitator injects items from the MSEL to further test and

examine aspects of the overall plan and each of the COAs. Examples of MSEL items include a

friendly aircraft collision during an air assault to examine the tactical recovery of aircraft and

personnel (TRAP) and other related responses in detail; a mass casualty event to examine the

casualty evacuation capabilities and response times to Role I, II, and III facilities; and an enemy

unit surrender to examine the comprehensive enemy prisoner of war (EPW) plan and associated

support requirements.

During each COA’s war game, planners develop the DST and decision support matrix (DSM). The

DST and DSM depict decision points, refined NAIs, TAIs, time phase lines, and other key

information gleaned or validated during COA wargaming and are included in theOPORD. See

Appendix D for DST and DSM examples and details.

The focus of COA wargaming is on improving the plan, vice the completion of the game. The

facilitator is therefore responsible for determining when each turn has met the objectives of the

war game, in accordance with wargaming guidance, the established timeline, and the facilitator

and lead planner’s judgment.

RECORDING THE WAR GAME

As lessons and findings are discovered during the COA war game, the recorder or applicable

planning team member will note recommended additions, changes, and updates for the

corresponding documents listed below—

MCWP 5-10

 IPB documents.

 ISR plan.

 Red and green cell documents, if applicable.

 CCIRs.

 Branches and sequels.

 Task organization.

 COA graphic and narrative.

 Synchronization matrix (additional tasks, sequencing modifications, change the location of a

headquarters or combat service support area, modify the phases and stages, etc.).

 Supporting concepts.

 DST and DSM.

 TAIs.

 Resource shortfalls.

 RFIs.

 Operation assessment plan.

 Risk assessment.

 COG analysis (friendly and enemy).

 HVTs.

 HPTs.

 COA war game worksheet.

 COA evaluation worksheet.

REFINE STAFF ESTIMATES,

ESTIMATES OF SUPPORTABILITY, AND SUPPORTING CONCEPTS

The staff and subordinate commands continue to develop their estimates and supporting concepts.

These estimates and supporting concepts are critical to the COA comparison and decision step and

eventually become a part of the OPLAN or OPORD. Criteria used in the development of estimates

and supporting concepts includes the above-mentioned COA war game recorded information, as

well as—

 Personnel replacement requirements.

 EPW requirements.

 Unit, asset, and resource requirements and shortfalls.

 Projected allocation of mobility assets, lift, and sorties versus availability.

 Requirement for pre-positioning equipment and supplies.

 Projected location of units and supplies for future operations.

 Projected location of the combat operations center and command post echelons.

 Command and control system requirements.

 Necessary authorities to act.

Marine Corps Planning Process

PREPARE COURSE OF ACTION WAR GAME BRIEF

The COA war game brief may include—

 List of specific decisions, approvals, and guidance requested of the commander

during the brief (e.g., approval of proposed CCIR changes, COA comparison and

decision guidance, etc.).

 Updated IPB.

 Updated information environment running estimate

 Review of COA wargaming guidance.

 Review of original task organizations and friendly COAs.

 Review of enemy/adversary COAs.

 Summary of the COA war game execution (by turn, or overall).

 Key findings and recommended changes discovered during the COA war game.

 Assumptions (validated and new).

 DST and DSM.

 COA war game worksheet.

 Updated friendly COAs (incorporating recommended changes).

 Advantages and disadvantages of each COA.

 Branches and sequels identified for development.

 Resource shortfalls.

 Recommended changes to CCIRs.

 RFIs.

 Updates to other planning documents (e.g., operation assessment plan).

COMMANDER’S COMPARISON AND DECISION GUIDANCE

The COA war game brief concludes with the commander’s approval of the updated COAs, or any

recommended changes to the original COAs, before they are compared. The commander also can

take this time to provide guidance for the comparison of the COAs, such as the type of COA

comparison input expected from staff officers.

CONSIDERATIONS

Initial, informal war games will likely take place during problem framing when the commander,

planners, and staff consider possible solutions as a basis for understanding as well as the

subsequent generation of a commander’s concept that informs the COA development guidance.

When formally conducted, a well-run COA war game can often be a time-consuming and onerous

process, but it is worth every minute of the effort. The iterative nature of the action-reaction-

counteraction process leads to the emergence or discovery of critical aspects of the operation. The

intuitive level of understanding gained reduces decision-making time in execution.

MCWP 5-10

A successful war game fosters a better understanding of the situation, which will lead to modified

COAs that better reflect the problem that planners are attempting to resolve.

The more turns examined in a war game, the further forward in time the staff must project events.

This projection will result in less detail and a greater number of assumptions—factors that

commanders and staffs must recognize when considering their results.

The rationale for wargaming two levels down makes sense for all the reasons discussed earlier in

this chapter. However, special recognititon must be given to the potential strategic impact of

tactical actions in the information age.

There are two main reasons planners may have to stop the war game and return to COA

development:

 A COA is beyond repair.

 A COA lacks sufficient information upon which to base the COA war game.

CHAPTER 5

COURSE OF ACTION COMPARISON AND DECISION

The first principle of a [commander] is to calculate what he must do, to see if he has

all the means to surmount the obstacles with which the enemy can oppose him and,

when he has made his decision, to do everything to overcome them.

—Napoleon Bonaparte, Warriors’ Words: A Quotation Book

When all is said and done the greatest quality required in commanders is ‘decision’. . .

—Viscount Montgomery of Alamein, Memoirs

During COA comparison and decision, the commander evaluates each friendly COA against the

established criteria, compares the COAs, and selects the COA believed to best accomplish the

mission. Inputs useful in COA comparison and decision may include—

 Updated IPB products.

 Updated, complete COAs.

 COA war game worksheet.

 Synchronization matrix.

 COA evaluation worksheet.

 Initial task organization.

 Resource and any shortfalls.

 Updated CCIRs.

 List of critical events and decision points.

 Staff estimates and estimates of supportability.

 DST and DSM.

 Branches and sequels identified for further planning.

PREPARE COURSE OF ACTION COMPARISON AND DECISION PRODUCTS

The planners refine the COA evaluation worksheet in preparation for the commander’s COA

comparison and decision. Planners use the commander’s evaluation criteria as well as their own

judgment to analyze each COA separately and capture the analysis on the COA evaluation

worksheet. Once complete, the planners create a draft COA comparison and decision worksheet

on which planners compare COAs against each other. Planners then provide these documents to

the commander, staff, and subordinate leadership as early as possible for an informed COA

comparison and decision discussion.

MCWP 5-10

COURSE OF ACTION COMPARISON AND DECISION DISCUSSION

The commander leads a discussion with the staff and subordinates about the relative merits of each

COA. The COA evaluation worksheet provides the commander with an understanding of the

relative merits of each COA and aids in decision-making. The commander then compares the

COAs against one another, using the COA comparison and decision worksheet. The commander

may solicit COA recommendations from the staff and subordinates, with their input recorded on

the COA comparison and decision worksheet. Since military operations are nonlinear by nature

and the smallest input can have a disproportional effect, the numerical weighting of factors offers

limited insights into the merits of one COA over another.

COMMANDER’S DECISION

In making a decision, the commander may—

 Select a COA.

 Modify a COA.

 Direct the development of a new COA, perhaps by combining favorable elements of

multiple COAs.

 Discard all COAs and resume problem framing or COA development, as required.

Once a decision is made, the commander may take advantage of the setting and review the

approved COA with the staff and subordinate commanders. The commander’s points of emphasis

guide further refinement of the COA and overall plan. The commander may also provide additional

guidance for branches and sequels (priorities, degree of completion required, etc.). With a decision,

detailed planning can accelerate now that the entire command’s focus is on a single, tested, and

validated COA.

UPDATE THE WARNING ORDER

The WARNORD informs subordinate units (e.g., organic, attached, supporting) to begin

concurrent planning that facilitates a more rapid and informed transition to execution.

CONSIDERATIONS

COA comparison and decision requires the commander’s involvement along with subordinate

commanders and their staffs for an informed, detailed discussion of the COAs. Ideally, all

participants can attend one meeting. The dialogue during this step represents a continuation of the

design effort because it offers multiple perspectives that deepen the group’s understanding of the

environment and the problem set.

During this discussion, participants should be able to view each COA through electronic

presentations, printouts, maps with icons, or a terrain board. Each COA should contain, at a

Marine Corps Planning Process

minimum, the supporting concepts of fires, maneuver, logistics, intelligence, information,

command and control, and force protection. Within the context of military operations, concepts

are visions of action.

In the event of a single COA, planners could allocate any time saved to additional wargaming or

developing branches and sequels.

If the commander selects a modified COA, planners fully develop the COA and then war game it

against selected enemy/adversary COAs, if time allows.

MCWP 5-10

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

CHAPTER 6

ORDERS DEVELOPMENT

As a rule, plans should contain only as much detail as required to provide

subordinates the necessary guidance while allowing as much freedom of action as

possible.

—MCDP 5, Planning

The purpose of orders development is to translate the commander’s decision into oral, written,

and/or graphic communication sufficient to guide execution and promote initiative by

subordinates. A form of detailed planning, the OPLAN or OPORD, once completed, becomes the

principal means by which the commander expresses his/her decision, intent, and guidance.

The orders development step in the MCPP should communicate the commander’s decision in a

clear, useful form that those executing the order can easily understand. An order is a written or

oral communication that directs actions and focuses a subordinate’s tasks and activities toward

accomplishing the mission. Planners prepare various portions of the order, such as the mission

statement, during previous steps of the MCPP. The development of the order begins during

problem framing and continues throughout the planning process, since so many of the planning

products either inform or become a part of the directive.

The order contains the critical information and necessary details required for successful execution

and assessment. Orders writers must focus on the audience (organic units, attachments, augments,

other Service supporting elements, allied elements, etc.). Many of these external elements will not

be familiar with the publishing command’s SOP, so the planning directive may contain selected

portions of the SOP or doctrinal references.

The updated, approved COA (task organization, graphic and narrative, synchronization matrix,

and supporting concepts) is a required input to orders development. Other inputs include—

 Mission statement.

 Commander’s intent and guidance.

 HHQ:

o Mission.

o Commander’s intent.

o OPORD.

o FRAGO.

o WARNORD.

 Updated IPB products.

 Updated CCIRs.

 Staff estimates.

 Branches and sequels.

MCWP 5-10

 Operation assessment plan.

 Risk assessment.

 WARNORD/planning orders.

 Existing plans and orders.

The chief of staff or the executive officer, as appropriate, directs orders development by dictating

the format for the order, setting and enforcing the time limits and development sequence, and

assigning annexes to specific staff sections. Effective information management throughout the

MCPP (version control of products, naming conventions, shared drive locations and access, etc.)

enables efficient orders production. On large staffs, the orders development division of labor has

the OPT developing the base order or plan to include command- and functional-level concepts.

The appropriate special staff member(s) and general staff section(s) (i.e., G-sections/S-sections)

develop respective annexes.

REFINE THE CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS

Planners extract the CONOPS from the details of the approved COA. In turn, the CONOPS is the

basis for supporting concepts, such as the concepts of fires, logistics, and force protection. Within

the context of military operations, concepts are a vision of actions. Accordingly, a CONOPS is a

general description of actions to be taken in pursuit of mission accomplishment. Armed with the

CONOPS and supporting concepts, planners, and their supporting staff sections, proceed with the

functional and detailed planning essential for the development of the plan or order and

implementation of the plan during execution.

PREPARE THE ORDER OR PLAN

Orders appear in a variety of forms, ranging from detailed, written documents with numerous

annexes to simple verbal commands. Their form depends on the time available, complexity of the

operation, and level of command involved. Staff estimates, estimates of supportability, and other

planning documents inform a plan or order’s annexes and appendices. See Appendix J for

order/plan formats.

The order in narrative form with graphics and a range of supporting documents serves to focus the

command during transition. The order is the vehicle by which the commander expresses intent and

assigns tasks to subordinates. The order ensures a common understanding and direction for every

staff section and subordinate unit toward the same objective.

With a basic order, commanders can issue FRAGOs to subordinate commanders to address

changes in the situation. Whatever the format, orders and plans must be clear, concise, timely, and

useful. Orders development also includes two essential quality control techniques—orders

reconciliation and orders crosswalk.

Marine Corps Planning Process

ORDERS RECONCILIATION

Orders reconciliation is a process internal to the command during which the planners review in

detail the entire order. The purpose of reconciliation is to ensure the basic order and all the annexes,

appendices, and other attachments are complete and in agreement. It identifies discrepancies or

gaps in the planning that will require corrective action. Specifically, the planning team compares

the commander’s intent, the mission, and the CCIRs against the CONOPS and the supporting

concepts, such as maneuver, fires, and logistics. Planners also ensure details throughout the

OPORD, such as dates, unit locations, and tasks, are accurate and in agreement. Orders

reconciliation may involve all planning team members in a single location, comparing a displayed

basic OPORD against their own annexes and appendices. Another option is for the lead planner to

distribute documents and collect individual feedback.

ORDERS CROSSWALK

Orders crosswalk is an external process in which the planners compare the completed, draft

OPORD with the orders of higher, adjacent, and subordinate commanders to achieve unity of effort

and ensure the CONOPS aligns, or nests, with the superior commander’s intent. Similarly,

transition events, such as confirmation briefs (discussed in chap. 7), can help a commander ensure

the subordinate units nest within the plan or order.

APPROVE THE ORDER OR PLAN

The final action in orders development is the approval of the order or plan by the commander.

While the commander does not have to sign every annex or appendix, it is important that he/she

reviews and signs the basic order or plan.

CONSIDERATIONS

For those who will receive and execute the order, they will devote most of their attention to the

base (five paragraph) order or plan. Therefore, the order must provide the reader with a sufficient

understanding of the overall plan to facilitate integration of functional capabilities and the nesting

of tasks and intents among commands to enhance the single-battle effort. Incorporating readable,

updated graphics or videos into the order are useful tools that aid the visualization of the order and

single-battle concept. For example, a basic OPORD Paragraph 4 that includes a summary of the

concept of logistics support and combat service support (CSS) (further articulated in Annex D,

Paragraph 3.a.), along with a graphic, would enable the general audience to understand how

logistics integrates into the overall plan.

All subordinate tasks are, if possible, included in the basic OPORD. If this is not practicable, higher

priority tasks are listed in the basic OPORD and additional tasks should appear no lower than the

appendix level.

MCWP 5-10

When writing plans or orders, words matter. Writers must remain consistent in their use of

approved terminology, particularly tactical tasks. For example, there is a significant difference

between “seize” and “secure.” Inappropriate or inconsistent terminology can lead to unintended

consequences, including mission creep, gaps, or redundancies. For more information on tactical

tasks, see MCDP 1-0 (with changes 1–3).

Updated SOPs are critical to producing a concise plan or order. For example, Annex U

(Information Management) of the order should only address information management topics

specific or unique to an operation or location. Meanwhile, the command can train to baseline

information management procedures contained in the SOPs to promote tactics, techniques, and

procedures excellence so critical to tempo. The SOPs need to be current, widely disseminated, and

used if the plan or order references them.

While meeting orders development timelines and requirements, planners continue to develop,

refine, and archive branches and sequels.

First and foremost, a plan or order must be a basis for action. Plans and orders, in conjunction with

SOPs, must provide the information infrastructure for the conduct of operations. For example, the

small unit leader who wishes to exploit a local advantage, still needs a detailed communication

plan to request and employ the necessary fire support. In turn, the pilot providing the fire support

needs detailed return-the-force procedures lest the pilot survive the engagement but not the return

flight to the airfield. In areas of responsibility with long-standing contingencies, OPLANs

combined with combatant command regulations and unit SOPs can provide the needed

information. For example, 7th MEB used a letter of instruction to deploy its forces to Saudi Arabia

in August 1990 for the first-ever, combat offload of a maritime prepositioning squadron. For other

operations, particularly natural disasters, planners will likely need to apportion a significant

amount of time to the production of orders to address the emergent combatant command

requirements, as well as host nation(s)’ considerations.

HAPTER

TRANSITION

. . . plans and orders exist for those who receive and execute them rather than those

who write them.

—MCDP 5, Planning

The written order is initially well-understood only by the small group that wrote it. Transition

enables the far larger group of executors (current operations staff, subordinate unit commanders

and staff, combat operations center members, etc.) to comprehensively understand the plan.

Transition enables the commander to personally brief, discuss, and rehearse the completed plan

with the staff and subordinate commanders prior to execution. Successful transition enhances the

situational understanding of those who will execute the order, reinforces the intent of the

commander, promotes unity of effort, and generates tempo. Transition may involve a wide range

of briefs, drills, and rehearsals necessary for a successful shift from planning to execution.

Transition accounts for the human element—how people learn and understand. Simply sending a

signed order to the staff and subordinates, and expecting successful comprehension and

implementation, is unwise. Seeing, hearing, discussing, questioning are important elements of

understanding the overall plan. At a minimum, this step includes a CONOPS brief along with a

discussion of key portions of the OPORD. Whenever possible, the transition step includes

rehearsals as well as confirmation briefs by subordinate commanders.

Transition is a continuous process that requires a free flow of information between commanders

and staffs by all available means. A designated planner coordinates details for the commander’s

transition events as well as required staff transition requirements (e.g., orders brief to the combat

operations center watch floor personnel). The planners ask and answer questions, highlight key

aspects of the order, and otherwise facilitate understanding of the plan for those who did not take

part in the planning process.

Transition occurs at all levels of command. On staffs with distinct planning and execution

capabilities (e.g., plans, future operations, and current operations), responsibility of the OPLAN

or OPORD must formally transfer during the transition step. If the unit SOP does not prescribe

when this transfer occurs, the transfer will generally occur after the commander’s final transition

event and resolution of any questions or issues raised during that event. Clear staff responsibility

and ownership of the plan is essential, so that one identified group (e.g., current operations) is

prepared to issue FRAGOs, refine and implement branches and sequels, etc., based on the evolving

situation. This formal staff transition also frees the OPT planners to focus on other plans and

problems or return to their parent units and sections.

MCWP 5-10

For transition to occur, an approved OPLAN or OPORD must exist. The approved order or plan

and the products of continuing staff actions form the input for transition. Other transition inputs

may include—

 HHQ updates and FRAGOs.

 Refined IPB products.

 Planning support tools.

 Draft FRAGOs for branches and sequels.

 Any outstanding issues.

TRANSITION PREPARATION

The planning and execution timeline, as well as the WARNORD issued after the COA comparison

and decision, prescribe many of the components of the transition events. As necessary, the

command issues a message to the staff and subordinates (including attachments, supporting units,

etc.) with amplifying details and requirements to ensure proper attendance and preparation.

Details common to nearly all transition events include:

 Date and time.

 Type of transition event.

 Location.

 Venue.

 Focus.

 Required briefers (e.g., specifying subordinate commanders or their operations officers).

 Sequence of events and briefs.

 Required attendees.

 Operations security requirements.

 Transition event rehearsal details.

 Recorder.

 Seating.

 Audio/visual/lighting arrangements.

 Display or terrain model preparations and responsibilities.

 Confirmation brief format, date, time, and location.

TRANSITION EVENTS

Ongoing missions, time, resources, operational security concerns, and other factors influence the

type of transition events. A common purpose these various events share is the need, in the interest

of tempo, to convey an intuitive level of understanding the planners gained to those that will

execute the plan. Options include:

 Full dress rehearsal.

Marine Corps Planning Process

 Reduced force rehearsal.

 Key leader rehearsal.

 Combined arms rehearsal.

 Rehearsal of concept drill.

 Communications exercise.

 Terrain model brief.

 Map brief.

 Transition brief.

TRANSITION COMPONENTS

Briefs within transition events include—

 HHQ mission (tasks and intent).

 Situation (friendly, enemy/adversary, and civilian population).

 Updated IPB.

 Mission.

 Commander’s intent.

 CCIRs.

 Task organization.

 CONOPS (overall, or by phase).

 Supporting concepts.

 Operation assessment overview.

 Assumptions (for plans).

 Execution (including branches and potential sequels).

 Planning support tools.

CONFIRMATION BRIEFS

Subordinate commanders provide a confirmation brief to their higher commander to—

 Confirm the subordinate commander’s understanding of the HHQ commander’s intent.

 Confirm the subordinate commander’s specific task and purpose.

 Discuss the relationship between the subordinate unit’s mission and that of the other units in

the operation.

 Discuss the subordinate unit’s draft COA or completed CONOPS.

The confirmation brief allows the HHQ commander to identify gaps in the plan, discrepancies

between his/her and the subordinate commanders’ plans, and learn how subordinate commanders

intend to accomplish their missions.

MCWP 5-10

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

APPENDIX A

MARINE CORPS PLANNING IN JOINT OPERATIONS

The MCPP is the vehicle through which commanders and their staffs in the Fleet Marine Forces

provide input to the joint planning process. See Joint Publication (JP) 5-0, Joint Planning.

JOINT PLANNING

The Joint Operation Planning and Execution System (JOPES) is the foundation for joint planning

and is the principal system for translating policy decisions into operation plans, concept plans, and

operation orders. Joint planning integrates military actions of the Services with those of

multinational partners and other instruments of national power to achieve a specified end state.

The military contribution to national strategic planning consists of joint strategic planning and its

three subsets—security cooperation planning, force planning, and joint operation planning. Joint

operation planning consists of contingency planning and crisis action planning (CAP). See figure

A-1.

Contingency planning and CAP share common planning activities and interrelate. Contingency

planning occurs in non-crisis situations. The process is highly structured to support iterative,

concurrent, and parallel planning to produce comprehensive, detailed plans. In-progress reviews

provide commanders opportunities to interact with their staffs, giving them further guidance to

ensure the planning effort meets their vision. Contingency planning facilitates the transition to

CAP. A combatant commander can use CAP to adjust existing contingency plans for rapid

execution. Crisis action planning shortens the process in light of the dynamic requirements of

changing events (see fig. A-2 on page A-2).

Figure A-1. Joint Strategic Planning.

MCWP 5-10

THE MARINE CORPS PLANNING PROCESS AND JOINT PLANNING

The MCPP aligns with and complements JOPES, especially during the plan development phase.

Supporting plans are developed once the combatant commander’s concept has been approved;

Marine Corps supporting plans address the tasks identified for Fleet Marine Forces and outline the

actions of assigned and augmenting forces. The MCPP provides an approach for commanders and

staffs to prepare supporting plans. Marine Corps Order P3000.18, Marine Corps Planner’s

Manual, establishes Marine Corps policies, procedures, and standards for developing and

executing plans for the deployment and redeployment of Marine Corps forces. The Marine Corps

deployment planning and execution process describes Marine Corps Service responsibilities

within JOPES. It provides specific procedures for Headquarters, United States Marine Corps

planners and for the commanders and staffs in the Fleet Marine Forces for contingency planning

and CAP.

This order addresses the combatant commander’s requirements for standing plans, which include

sourcing the types and numbers of units, sustainment for units, and replacement manpower.

The MCPP aligns with CAP beginning with situation development and continuing throughout the

process as Marine Corps planners develop new plans or expand or modify existing plans.

Figure A-2. Contingency and Crisis Action

Planning Activities, Functions, and Products.

APPENDIX B

ORGANIZATION FOR PLANNING

The commander organizes the staff to gather, manage, and process information essential to

decision-making. Organization for planning not only involves personnel, structure, and a plan to

plan, but planning modes will affect the organization for planning, as well.

PLANNING MODES AND LEVELS

The MCPP facilitates planning at all levels and satisfies three modes of planning—orientation,

contingency, and commitment—as described in MCDP 5. Orientation planning is used when the

degree of uncertainty is so high that it is not worthwhile to commit to a specific plan. Planners

focus on assessing the situation and designing flexible preliminary plans that can adapt to a broad

variety of situations. Contingency planning applies to situations when there is less uncertainty, but

not enough is known to allow for the adoption of a specific plan. Normally, planners prepare for

several contingencies, allowing the commander to respond quickly when the situation requires

action. During commitment planning, the commander selects a plan and commits resources to

executing the plan. Commanders and planners consider these modes when organizing their

planning efforts to ensure they use a mode and planning sequence appropriate to the situation. See

MCDP 5 for further discussion on planning modes.

These modes span the planning horizon based on degrees of uncertainty. Additionally, planning

may also be viewed as a hierarchical continuum with conceptual, functional, and detailed levels of

planning. As discussed in chapter 1, conceptual planning is the highest level, establishing aims,

objectives, and broad concepts for action. Detailed planning is the lowest level of planning,

translating the broad concept into a complete and practicable plan. In between these two levels is

functional planning, which involves elements of both conceptual and detailed planning and is

concerned with designing supporting concepts for warfighting functions, such as maneuver or

force protection. Planning modes and levels are interrelated. For instance, commitment planning

normally includes considerable detailed planning that facilitates execution, while orientation

planning most often remains at the conceptual planning level.

To gain and maintain tempo, commanders and their staffs must be involved in all modes and levels

of planning by ensuring a constant flow of information vertically within the chain of command

and laterally among staff sections. At the small-unit level, this information exchange can be simple

and direct—commander to commander or operations officer to operations officer. In larger-sized

units, such as the component or MEF, a more formal arrangement that uses liaison officers and

distinct planning organizations is necessary due to the scope and detail involved as well as the

requirement to align with HHQ planning organizations and to properly address the entire planning

continuum.

MCWP 5-10

Planning is an event-dominated process; therefore, commanders should organize planning

organizations to enhance planning for significant events, such as changes in mission. Conversely,

time-driven processes are a necessary, yet subordinate, aspect of planning. Planners must address

both time- and event-driven processes, while maintaining the proper perspective between the two.

For example, the air tasking order is critical to the planning and execution of operations and it is

produced in a cycle that requires timely input from subordinates. Nevertheless, the air tasking order

is produced in support of the plan—it is not the plan.

PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS

The MCPP is scalable from the component level to the battalion and squadron level. Lower

command levels, such as battalions and squadrons, adapt and consolidate certain planning

responsibilities and functions within their limited structures. Normally at these command levels,

most MCPP procedures are performed by the commander, primary staff officers, and select special

staff officers. Figure B-1 shows the planning organization and relationships found at lower levels

of command, such as a battalion.

Higher levels of command (MEF, MEB, division, wing, or logistics group) form specialized

planning staff elements and organizations. Figure B-2 illustrates planning organizations at the

Marine Corps component and MEF and their link to HHQ.

Planning Organizations

Three planning organizations—future plans, future operations, and current operations—at the

component and MEF levels are primarily responsible for the conduct of the planning process. They

must coordinate their efforts to ensure a smooth transition from long-term planning to execution.

Future Plans Division

The future plans division is normally under the staff cognizance of the G-5. Among its many

responsibilities, the G-5 normally forms a liaison element to the HHQ staff; integrates the HHQ

plan into the MEF’s planning process; plans the next mission, phase, or operation; and oversees

the force deployment planning and execution process for the command. Upon receipt of tasks from

HHQ, this division initiates the MEF’s planning process by assisting the commander with the

initial design and developing an outline plan. Depending on the situation, it may focus on a phase

of a campaign, develop reconstitution requirements, or plan deployment. This division’s

responsibility is to conduct the initial design effort as a basis for subsequent planning.

The future plans division may also develop sequels, support relationships for the next phase, and

develop plans to ensure the force does not reach a culminating point. Future plans will transition

an outline plan to the future operations center. The outline plan provides the salient features of a

mission and precedes detailed planning.

Marine Corps Planning Process

Figure B-1. Notional Lower Level Organizations and Planning Relationships.

Future Operations Center

The future operations section is under the staff cognizance of the G-3 and is the focal point of the

planning process. It usually forms the nucleus of an OPT and coordinates with both the future

plans and current operations centers to integrate planning. The future operations center will either

inherit outline plans from the future plans division or receive planning requirements from the

current operations center that exceed its planning horizon. The future operations center fully

integrates the other staff centers’ plans officers, warfighting function representatives, and

subordinate unit representatives into the planning process. It takes the outline plan from the future

plans division and uses it as the basis for further planning. The future operations center focuses on

changes to subordinate missions and develops branch plans and sequels. This center interacts with

intelligence collection and the targeting process to shape the next battle. The current operations

center may provide a representative to the future operations center to facilitate an efficient

transition process. This representative returns to the current operations center during transition.

The future operations center’s efforts generate tempo internal to the force.

Current Operations Center

The current operations center is under the staff cognizance of the G-3. During operations, it

receives the OPORD from the OPT prior to the transition brief. The current operations center—

 Coordinates and executes the OPORD.

 Prepares and transmits FRAGOs.

 Monitors operations of the force.

 Tracks CCIRs and reports relevant information to the commander.

 Analyzes and synthesizes battlespace information.

MCWP 5-10

Figure B-2. Notional Component and Marine

Expeditionary Force Organizations and Planning Relationships.

When unforeseen events develop, the current operations center refines or develops branch plans.

To support the commander, the current operations center may develop new COAs, allocate

resources, and prepare FRAGOs to modify the current OPORD. This center assesses change in the

battlespace and progress toward the mission and purpose; monitors the status of forces and

materiel; monitors rear area operations; coordinates terrain management; maintains a common

operational picture and information; and provides the future operations center with situational

awareness.

TEAMS

Operational Planning Team

The OPT is an organization formed by either the future plans division or future operations center

to conduct integrated planning. The OPT helps frame problems, develops and wargames COAs,

and leads or assists the staff in the preparation and transition of the order. Normally, the OPT is

built around a core group of planners from either the future plans division or the future operations

center and may include the future plans or future operations officer, assistant plans or assistant

future operations officer, future plans or future operations chief, and a clerk/plotter. It integrates

additional staff representatives from the G-1, G-2, G-3, G-4, G-5, G-6, staff judge advocate,

provost marshal, health services, or COMMSTRAT sections, as appropriate to the mission. The

OPT may also include the warfighting function or lines of operations (LOOs) representatives,

liaison officers, and SMEs needed to support planning. While all staff sections conduct planning

in their respective areas of expertise and mini-OPTs can be formed to address specific problems,

the commander’s integrated, single-battle effort resides in the OPT, whether formed by future

plans or future operations. Commanders of smaller organizations that lack separate staff sections

may also form OPTs because the term often applies to working groups and integrated planning

teams formed to address any issue of importance to the commander.

Marine Corps Planning Process

Crisis Action Team

The crisis action team (CAT) falls under the staff cognizance of the G-3. The CAT is usually

formed in the initial stages of a crisis and has the requirement to rapidly collect and manage

information. It can be task-organized to reflect the unique nature of a crisis. Often, at the initial

stage of a crisis, the commander’s primary concern is force readiness status and deployment

planning. The CAT may initiate the planning process, develop situational awareness, and access

previously prepared and emerging planning products. To facilitate a common situational

awareness, potential members of the CAT are identified in advance and recalled for initial crisis

action planning. For extended operations, the CAT’s planning and execution functions transition

to the normal planning organizations, whether current operations, future operations, or future

plans, and their staffing and functions are redefined.

WARFIGHTING FUNCTION REPRESENTATIVES

The MEF or a major subordinate command is not restricted in their planning or conduct of

operations. For example, the ground combat element does not only consider maneuver and the

ACE does not only consider fires. Planners at all echelons of command must consider and integrate

activities within and among all the warfighting functions.

Warfighting function or LOO representatives should be selected because of their experience and

training. They should also be trained and experienced in the MCPP and consideration is needed

regarding the rank of the representative, which may be necessary at higher command levels. A

warfighting function or LOO representative may be on the commander’s staff, a member of a

subordinate unit staff, a commander of a supporting unit or organization from another Service or

nation, or any Marine qualified to address the issues of a particular functional area or LOO.

Designation as a representative may be an additional responsibility; for example, a Marine could

serve simultaneously as a warfighting function/LOO representative, a staff member, and a staff

representative to the OPT.

USE OF LIAISONS

Liaisons are the point of contact through which intercommunication is maintained between

elements of military forces to ensure shared understanding and unity of purpose and action.

Through direct communications, a liaison ensures senior commanders remain aware of the tactical

situation by providing them with exceptional, critical, or routine information; verification of

information; and clarification of operational questions. Overall, the liaisons are another tool to help

commanders reduce the fog of war, overcome friction, and accomplish the mission.

Command Liaison

Commanders of all organizations routinely initiate contact with commanders of other units in their

locale even though there may be no official command or support relationship between them. This

contact opens the channels of communications to facilitate mutual security and support.

MCWP 5-10

Staff Liaison

Staff officers of all organizations routinely initiate contact with their counterparts at higher, lower,

adjacent, supporting, and supported commands. This contact opens channels of communication

that are essential for the proper planning and execution of military operations. Staff liaisons may

also include the temporary assignment of liaisons to other commands.

Liaison Officers

The most commonly used way to maintain close, continuous contact with another command is

through the liaison officer. He/She is the commander’s personal representative and has the special

trust and confidence of the commander to make appropriate recommendations and estimates in the

absence of communications. As necessary, the commander uses a liaison officer to transmit or

receive critical information directly with key persons in the receiving headquarters. The liaison

officer must possess the requisite rank and experience to properly represent the command. The

ability to communicate effectively is essential, as is the liaison officer’s sound judgment and

immediate access to the commander.

Liaison Team

A liaison team, usually headed by the liaison officer, is assigned when the workload or need for

better communications is greater than the capabilities of a single liaison officer. The liaison team

will normally consist of the liaison officer, a liaison chief, clerical personnel, drivers, and

communications personnel with equipment. Members of the liaison team may function as couriers

when necessary. The grade of the senior member of the liaison team depends on the unit’s size and

personnel available. Liaison teams are generally required for continuous operations.

Couriers

Although infrequently used because of the capabilities of electronic communications, the courier

remains a valuable liaison element. The courier is more than a messenger and is expected to

provide more information than is contained in the message being delivered. For this reason, the

courier should possess sufficient experience and maturity to respond to questions and provide more

than superficial insight into the situation or issues of concern. Individuals selected as couriers are

often junior officers or staff noncommissioned officers. If such personnel are available, dedicated

couriers may be used to augment the liaison officer or liaison team.

Operational Planning Team Representatives

The subordinate command’s OPT representatives are key contributors to the planning process and

the future operations plan. These individuals provide timely and accurate movement of information

between the OPT and their commands. Normally, these individuals’ primary responsibility is to

the planning effort. They may only be able to provide part-time support to other activities, such as

logistics coordination or targeting.

APPENDIX

MARINE CORPS PLANNING PROCESS DIAGRAMS

Figures C-1 through C-6 are graphic depictions of the injects, activities, and results for each step

of the planning process. The results of each step provide the injects for the following step, keeping

in mind the process as a whole is as much iterative as it is sequential. The diagrams are not intended

to be used as a checklist, but as a ready reference to help promote clarity of understanding for the

entire process. The information shown in bold is meant to highlight the personal involvement of

the commander for each step.

Figure C-1. Injects, Activities, and Results Diagram for Problem Framing.

Figure C-2. Injects, Activities, and Results Diagram for Course of Action Development.

MCWP 5-10

Figure C-3. Injects, Activities, and Results Diagram for Course of Action War Game.

Figure C-4. Injects, Activities, and Results

Diagram for Course of Action Comparison and Decision.

Marine Corps Planning Process

Figure C-5. Injects, Activities, and Results Diagram for Orders Development.

Figure C-6. Injects, Activities, and Results Diagram for Transition.

MCWP 5-10

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

APPENDIX D

MARINE CORPS PLANNING PROCESS TOOLS

The commander and staff use the MCPP tools to record, track, display, and analyze critical

planning information. These tools help the commander, planners, and staff better understand the

environment, facilitate the commander’s decision-making, assist in the preparation of plans and

orders, and increase tempo. The MCPP tools must serve the needs of the commander and the

requirements of the situation. Commanders and staffs can tailor these tools to meet their needs and

use other available tools that are appropriate for their particular problem. Many of these tools are

either directly or indirectly included in the OPORD.

Table D-1 identifies commonly used templates, worksheets, and matrices and notes how each tool

supports the MCPP. The examples in this appendix are at the MEF level, but these tools may be

employed at any level of command. The formats and uses of these tools may be modified as

required.

Table D-1. Marine Corps Planning Process Tools.

Overlays, Templates,

Matrices,

Work-

sheets, and

Graphics

and

Narratives

Problem

Framing

COA

Development

COA

War

Game

COA

Comparison

and Decision

Orders

Development

Transition

IPB Integration

(see table D-2)

Modified combined

obstacle overlay

(see fig. D-1)

Adversary template

(see fig. D-2)

Situation template

(see fig. D-3)

Event template

(see fig. D-4)

Event matrix

(see table

D-3)

Decision support template

(see fig. D-5)

Decision support matrix

(see table D-4)

COA graphic and narrative

(see figs. D-6a and D-6b)

Synchronization matrix

(see table D-5)

MCWP 5-10

COA war game work-

sheet (see table D-6)

Comparison and

decision matrix with

comments

(see table D-7)

OPORD assignment

matrix (see table D-8)

Liaison plan

(see table D-9)

Planning and execution

timeline

(see table D-10)

ASCOPE matrix

(see fig. D-7)

INTELLIGENCE PREPARATION OF THE BATTLESPACE PRODUCTS

Intelligence preparation of the battlespace is the systematic, continuous process of analyzing the

threat and environment in a specific geographic area. The four steps of IPB are: (1) define the

operational environment, (2) describe the effects on operations, (3) evaluate the enemy/adversary,

and (4) determine enemy/adversary courses of action. Led by the intelligence section, IPB is a

whole-of-staff activity and is conducted and updated continually.

The OPT develops and refines IPB products, to include enemy COAs. The IPB products must

mature and update as planning progresses. For example, as the OPT works through problem

framing, COA development, and COA war game, it may conduct pattern analysis of enemy

actions—as well as the activities of local inhabitants—to better understand the operational

environment. This pattern analysis feeds the development of various templates. These contribute

to a DST created later in the MCPP, complete with NAIs, TAIs, and decision points.

Below are summaries and examples of IPB products. For additional information, consult MCRP

2-10B.1, Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield/Battlespace.

Table D-2. Intelligence Preparation of the Battlespace

Integration Throughout the Marine Corps Planning Process.

Problem

Framing

COA

Development

COA

War Game

Comparison

and Decision

Orders

Development

Transition

Modified

combined

obstacle overlay

Adversary

template

Continuous

Situation

template

Continuous

G-2/S-2

Marine Corps Planning Process

Pertinent enemy /

adversary COAs

Continuous

Refined and

prioritized adver-

sary COAs and

event templates

and matrices

Continuous

Initial decision

support template

Continuous

Decision support

template and

matrix

Continuous

Note:

Templates are updated throughout the operation.

Modified Combined Obstacle Overlay

The modified combined obstacle overlay (also referred to as MCOO) (fig. D-1) is a graphic of the

battlespace’s effects on military operations. It is normally based on a product depicting all

obstacles to mobility and it is modified as necessary. Modifications can include crosscountry

mobility classifications, objectives, avenues of approach and mobility corridors, likely obstacles,

defensible battlespace, likely engagement areas, key terrain, cultural factors, built-up areas, and

civil infrastructure.

Figure D-1. Modified Combined Obstacle Overlay.

G-2/S-2

G-3/S-3/OPT

MCWP 5-10

Adversary Template

Adversary templates (see fig. D-2) are models based on enemy doctrine. They illustrate the

disposition and activity of enemy forces conducting a particular operation arrayed on ideal (often

flat, open) terrain. Adversary templates depict the enemy’s nominal organization, frontages,

depths, boundaries, and control measures for combat. They are usually scaled for use with a map

background and they are one part of an adversary model. In irregular warfare, adversary templating

will focus on pattern analysis, which involves tracking, analyzing, and identifying specific trends,

such as the use of improvised explosive devices or population support, over time. Commanders

should also consider adversary actions external to the area of operations that may have immediate

impacts within the battlespace.

Figure D-2. Adversary Template.

Marine Corps Planning Process

Situation Template

A situation template (fig. D-3) is an adversary template that has been modified to depict

enemy/adversary dispositions based on the effects of the battlespace and the pursuit of a particular

COA. This template accounts for the enemy’s/adversary’s current situation with respect to the

terrain, training and experience levels, logistic status, losses, and dispositions. Normally, the

situation template depicts enemy/adversary units’ two levels down and critical points in the COA.

Situation templates are one part of an enemy/adversary COA model. Models may contain more

than one situation template to depict locations and formations at various times.

Figure D-3. Situation Template.

MCWP 5-10

Event Template and Matrix

The event template is derived from the situation template and depicts the NAIs, areas where

activity—or lack of activity—will indicate which COA the enemy/adversary has adopted. Event

templates contain time phase lines that depict movement of forces and the expected flow of the

operation. Movement rates depend on the terrain (modified combined obstacle overlay) and the

enemy/adversary COA (DRAW-D [defend, reinforce, attack, withdraw, and delay]). The event

template is the IPB starting point for COA wargaming. The event matrix depicts types of activity

expected in each NAI, when the NAI is expected to be active, and any additional information to

aid in collection planning. See figure D-4 and table D-3.

Figure D-4. Event Template.

Table D-3. Event Matrix.

Named Area

of Interest

Earlier Than

Later Than

Event/Indicator

H+6

H+12

Brigade-sized forces moving north.

H+6

H+12

Brigade-sized forces moving north.

H+12

H+24

Orangeland forces enter Blueland. Northern operational

group driving on Jesara oil fields.

Marine Corps Planning Process

H+14

H+24

Orangeland forces seize junction of highways 7 and 8.

Northern operational group turns northwest toward

Jesara.

H+18

H+24

Orangeland forces enter Tealton. Northern operational

group driving on Jesara.

Decision Support Template and Matrix

The DST is normally developed during COA wargaming. It is derived from enemy/adversary,

situational, and event templates. The DST depicts decision points, time phase lines associated with

movement of enemy/adversary and friendly forces, the flow of the operation, and other information

required to execute a specific friendly COA. The DST is a key planning tool for use during

transition and execution. The DSM provides an outline of expected events, decision points, and

planned friendly actions in a narrative form. It shows where and when a decision must be made if

a specific action is to take place. It ties decisions and decision points to CCIRs, ISR, NAIs, TAIs,

and potential friendly response options. The DST and DSM may be refined as planning progresses

after the COA war game, and is published in the final OPORD. See figure D-5 and table D-4.

Figure D-5. Decision Support Template.

MCWP 5-10

Table D-4. Decision Support Matrix.

Event

Number

Event

No Earlier Than/

No Later Than

Named Area

of Interest

Target Area

of Interest

Friendly Action

Orangeland forces enter

Blueland. Northern operational

group division driving on

Tealton.

H+14/H+24

1, 2

A, B

Covering force withdraws; Marine

aircraft wing conducts interdiction

west of phase line TEAL.

Orangeland forces seize junction

of Highways 7 and 8. Northern

operational group turns

northwest on Jesara.

H+18/H+24

3, 4

1st

and 3d

Marine Divisions

execute branch plan HAWK.

PLANNING SUPPORT TOOLS

Planning support tools support the commander’s and staff’s planning effort by recording and

displaying critical planning information on the COAs and the commander’s decisions and

guidance. They aid the commander in decision-making by displaying critical information in a

useful format. Planning support tools include the COA graphic and narrative, synchronization

matrix, COA war game worksheets, and the comparison and decision matrix.

Course of Action Graphic and Narrative

The COA graphic and narrative clearly portray how the organization will accomplish the mission,

identifying: who (task organization), what (tasks), when, where, how, and why (intent). See figures

D-6a and D-6b. Planners must determine how best to depict the key elements of the COA without

cluttering the graphic. The COA graphic and narrative, when approved by the commander, forms

the basis for the CONOPS and operations overlay in the OPLAN or OPORD.

Depending on the unit, problem, environment, and type of operation, COA graphic and narrative

elements may include:

 Form of maneuver.

 Main effort tasks and purpose.

 Supporting efforts (task and purpose of each).

 Reserve (location, priorities).

 Control measures (e.g., fire support coordination measures, maneuver control measures,

airspace coordinating measures).

 Boundaries.

 Objectives.

 Command posts.

 Rear area boundaries and associated unit (e.g., rear area commander).

 NAIs.

 TAIs.

 Combat service support areas.

Marine Corps Planning Process

 Airfields.

 Forward arming and refueling points.

 ISR locations.

 Enemy/adversary forces.

 Adjacent forces.

 Civilian groups.

 Routes and axes.

 Barriers and obstacles.

 Essential fire support tasks.

 Operations in the information environment support tasks.

Figure D-6a. Course of Action Graphic.

MCWP 5-10

Phase III, Stage A

At D+6, III MEF defeats Dakotian forces south of International

Boundary IOT restore Northland sovereignty.

3d MARDIV (ME):

T1:

Destroy the 2nd Infantry Div.

P1:

IOT restore Northland sovereignty.

T2:

Screen east of Valleyville.

P2:

IOT deny ENY reinforcing forces IVO Valleyville.

T3:

Provide one RLT as the MEF Reserve.

P3:

Provide the MEF CG with flexibility to react to ENY actions.

1st MAW (SE1):

T1:

Interdict ENY forces IVO Highlandville.

P1:

IOT prevent ENY reinforcing forces IVO Valleyville.

T2:

Provide air assault support to TF Hawk.

P2:

IOT support TF Hawk seizure of Summerville oil fields and key infrastructure.

TF Hawk (SE2):

T1:

Conduct air assault IVO Summerville oil fields and destroy ENY forces.

P1:

IOT reclaim Summerville oil fields and key infrastructure.

3d MLG (SE3):

T1:

Provide DS to ME attack.

P1:

IOT facilitate the ME attack against the 2nd Infantry Div.

T2:

Establish CSSA IVO Springville.

P2:

IOT sustain MEF operations during Phase III, Stage B.

TF Guardian (SE4):

T1:

As RACOM, conduct 8 functions rear area operations.

P1:

IOT allow MEF to conduct decisive operations against Dakotian forces.

Reserve (SE5):

T1:

Locate east of CSSA Springville

Priorities: BPT

EF ST1:

T1:

Disrupt 50th Fires Regt.

P1:

IOT facilitate ME attack.

OIE ST1:

T1:

Deny information on ME direction and timing.

P1:

IOT create an advantage for the MEF.

Legend

BCL battlefield coordination line

IVO in the vicinity of

OIE operations in the information

environment

BPT beach party team

JTF joint task force

CG commanding general

MARDIV Marine division

P purpose

RACOM rear area commander

CSSA combat service support area

MAW Marine aircraft wing

Div division

ME main effort

Regt regiment

DS direct support

MLG Marine logistics group

RLT regimental landing team

EFST essential fire support task

MSR main supply route

SE supporting effort

ENY enemy

NAI named area of interest

ST supporting task

FSCL fire support coordination line

NFA no-fire area

T task

IOT in order to

TF task force

Figure D-6b. Course of Action Narrative.

Marine Corps Planning Process

Synchronization Matrix

The synchronization matrix (see table D-5) is a working document showing the activities of the

command and subordinate elements over time. It displays how units, warfighting functions, and

tasks interrelate throughout all phases, providing additional details that complement and amplify

the COA graphic and narrative. Additional details to this matrix may include displacement of the

command post, priorities and location of the reserve element, information integration specifics,

and sequencing of tasks and movements. A synchronization matrix should not be used to overly

script the actions of subordinate units. If a plan is too tightly coupled, it is easily damaged, difficult

to repair, and lacks the flexibility to address the inherent friction and uncertainty of war. The

detailed, completed synchronization matrix is a key component of a productive COA war game.

During orders development, the completed synchronization matrix enables planners to efficiently

assign tasks to subordinates and aids in developing Annex X (Execution Checklist) of the OPLAN

or OPORD.

Table D-5. Synchronization Matrix.

Phase II Stage C

Phase III Stage A

Phase III Stage B

Phase III Stage C

Major Events

Shaping, Force Re-Set,

MILDEC, Counterreconnaissance

Fix, Penetrate, Exploit

Clear / Defeat Bypassed Forces/

Secure Valleyville

Withdrawal

Desired State

2 x CAG Bns IVO 1st Motor Div are

combat ineffective.

1st MID & 2nd Mech DAGs are

combat ineffective.

Air threat reduced to manpad.

Logistically postured for Phase III.

Armor formations are attrited to

XX%.

GCE readiness rate is above XX%.

GCE IVO Springville.

Right flank protected.

Logistically postured for Phase III,

Stage B.

Bypassed ENY is cleared / defeated.

Valleyville secured.

5th Corps fixed.

NORTHLAND border

restored.

Maneuver

GCE

T - DEFEAT ENY reconnaissance

south of XXX.

P – Ensure tactical surprise in

Phase III Stage A.

T - FIX 1st Motor Div IVO Valleyville

(regain / maintain contact).

P - ALLOW penetrations of

defensive belts.

T - PENETRATE 1st Motor/2nd

Mech Div defensive belts on E-5.

P - ALLOW exploitation into ENY

rear area.

T - DISRUPT ENY CSS and C2

nodes IVO MEF OBJ A

(Springville).

T - INTERDICT GLOCs IVO MEF

OBJ A (Springville).

P - PREVENT commitment of ENY

strategic reserve (5th Corps).

T - BPT block 101 AD.

T - CLEAR bypassed ENY in zone in

NORTHLAND.

T - DEFEAT bypassed ENY in zone in

DAKOTA.

T - SECURE Valleyville.

P - ENABLE NORTHLAND-DAKOTA

international border restoration.

T - WITHDRAW south of

NORTHLAND-DAKOTA

international border.

T - OCCUPY defensive

sectors along the border.

T - BPT transition security to

host nation.

MCWP 5-10

ACE

T - SHAPE IVO XXXXX.

P – XXXXX.

T - Provide sorties to CFACC ISO

shaping.

T - Aerial reconnaissance.

T - GUARD GCE’s right

(east/southeast) flank.

P - ALLOW exploitation to MEF

OBJ A (Springville).

T - BPT block 101 AD.

T - BPT establish FARP at XXX.

T - BPT displace EW/C.

T - INTERDICT reinforcements IVO

XXXXX.

T - WITHDRAW south of

NORTHLAND-DAKOTA

international border.

Mobility /

Counter

mob

ility

T - Breach obstacle belts IVO

XXXXX.

T - Ensure mobility through wet/dry

gap crossing.

T - ASSIST in clearing

obstacles and improving

mobility.

Adjacent

TF West and 1st NORTHLAND -

FIX (invert Stage A & B tasks).

CFMCC amphibious demonstration.

TF West and 1st NORTHLAND - FIX

(invert Stage A & B tasks).

RIP/TOA with host-nation

security forces in liberated

areas of NORTHLAND.

Reserve

Mech infantry heavy Bn TF located

IVO XXXX.

Priorities: 1.XXXXX, 2. XXXXXX.

Intel

ligence

NAIs

1, 2

3, 4

Organic Collections

Recon. Route reconnaissance of

MSR RED. Shaping.

SIGINT Support Team. Identifying

C2/AD nodes.

CI support to FP.

Locate HPTs.

UAS. Identify ENY recon elements

in passes and obstacle belts.

HUMINT. Identify HPTs in

Valleyville.

SIGINT Support Team. I&W of 1st

Corps brigades movement.

UAS. Identify ENY recon elements

in passes and obstacle belts. IVO

NAI XXXX, YYYY, ZZZZ.

Recon. Provide I&W of 1st Corps units

moving south.

UAS. Identify ENY positions south of

Valleyville. Provide recce for supply

convoys.

HUMINT. XXXXX.

SIGINT. Identify movement of

25th/2nd defensive positions.

UAS. Identify any emplaced

obstacles or destroyed routes

in MEF’s rear area.

HUMINT. Identify remaining

DAKOTIAN SOF within

NORTHLAND. Identify

population sentiment of CF

withdrawal. Identify

intentions of 1st and 5th

Corps.

SIGINT. Identify remaining

DAKOTIAN forces within

NORTHLAND.

Higher's Collections

UAS and IMINT identify obstacle

belts along MSR RED.

UAS/SIGINT identify I&W of 2nd

MID/101st AD movement.

IMINT identify battle positions of

20th/25th/101st.

UAS/SIGINT identify I&W of 5th

Corps movement or mobilization /

WMD employment.

Locate HPTs/ ENY collection

assets.

UAS/SIGINT identify I&W of 2nd

MID/ 101st AD movement.

UAS/SIGINT identify I&W of 5th

Corps movement or mobilization /

WMD employment.

Locate HPTs.

UAS/SIGINT Identify movement of 1st

Corps units south to reinforce.

UAS/SIGINT identify I&W of 5th Corps

movement or mobilization / WMD

employment.

Locate HPTs.

IMINT. Identify change of

battle positions of 1st or 5th

Corps units.

UAS/SIGINT. Identify I&W of

movement of 1st or 5th Corps

units.

Assess DAKOTAIN and

NORTHLAND ability to

provide internal security

within their borders.

HPTs

SA-15, SA-17, Skyguard, Crotale,

ADA radar.

C2 nodes (Div and above) /

commanders.

CAG / DAG (Btry / Bn).

Priorities may change.

HPTs may change.

SOF.

Marine Corps Planning Process

Fires

Lethal

NEUTRALIZE HPTs (mobile AD,

Div/Corps artillery, Div and above

C2 nodes).

LIMIT ability of ENY armor

formations (101 BDE, Div Tank

BDEs) to CATK vs GCE maneuver.

LIMIT ability of ENY armor formations

(101 BDE, Div Tank BDEs) to CATK

GCE maneuver.

INTERDICT reinforcements.

SUPPORT GCE operations against

bypassed forces.

T - SUPPORT GCE

operations.

FSCMs

Leave FSCM as is, if CFACC can

strike targets we nominate.

Request battlespace and establish

FSCMs after AD assets are

neutralized if CFACC cannot/will not

strike our targets.

BCL shift.

Sync w/ adjacent units.

ESTABLISH FSCMs to support GCE.

SHIFT FSCMs to rear.

Information

EMSO

T-1 – Determine any ENY attempts

to degrade, disrupt, neutralize, or

destroy friendly force C2.

P-1 – Determine ENY C2 targets

and protect against electronic

attack.

T-2 – Establish signature

management plan in conjunction

with deception effort at decoy rally

point to the West IVO Freeway 101.

P-2 – Protect friendly force C2

practices ISO Phase III operations.

T-1 – Determine any ENY attempts

to degrade, disrupt, neutralize, or

destroy friendly force C2.

P-2 – Determine ENY C2 targets

and protect against electronic

attack.

T-2 -- Disrupt ENY AD capabilities.

P-2 – Support friendly force ACE

operations.

T-3 – Disrupt ENY battalion and

division C2 signals IVO Springville.

P-3 – Limit ENY force coordination

and response to friendly force

actions.

T-1 – Determine any ENY attempts to

degrade, disrupt, neutralize, or destroy

friendly force C2.

P-2 – Determine ENY C2 targets and

protect against electronic attack.

T-2 -- Disrupt ENY AD capabilities.

P-2 – Support friendly force ACE

operations.

T-3 – Disrupt ENYbattalion and

division C2 signals IVO Springville.

P-3 – Limit ENY force coordination and

response to friendly force actions.

T-1 – Employ signature

management plan for steady

state operations.

P-1 – Establish normal

reporting networks for post

operation requirements.

CYBER

T-1 – DCO: Defend local network

against cyberattack/cyberdenial.

P-1 – Ensure tactical friendly force

C2.

T-2 – Defend HHQ servers against

cyberattack.

P-2 – Ensure reach back support

from HHQ ISO of friendly force

operations.

T-1 -- DCO: Defend local network

against cyberattack/cyberdenial.

P-1 – Ensure tactical friendly force

C2.

T-2 – Defend HHQ servers against

cyberattack.

P-2 – Ensure reach back support

from HHQ ISO of friendly force

operations.

T-3 – OCO: Target DAKOTIAN

propaganda networks.

P-3 – Deny DAKOTIAN ability to

upload/share misinformation /

disinformation via social media.

T-1 -- DCO: Defend local network

against cyberattack/cyberdenial.

P-1 – Ensure tactical friendly force C2.

T-2 – Defend HHQ servers against

cyberattack.

P-2 – Ensure reach back support from

HHQ ISO of friendly force operations.

T-3 – OCO: Target DAKOTIAN

propaganda networks.

P-3 – Deny DAKOTIAN ability to

upload/share misinformation /

disinformation via social media.

T-1 -- DCO: Defend local

network against

cyberattack/cyberdenial.

P-1 – Ensure tactical friendly

force C2.

SPACE

T-1 – Disrupt ENY use of GPS.

P-1 -- Limit ENY force coordination

and response to friendly force

actions.

T-1 – Disrupt ENY use of GPS.

P-1 -- Limit ENY force coordination

and response to friendly force actions.

INFLUENCE

T-1 – Deploy CA contact team to

Valleyville to engage with local

political leaders.

P-1 – Influence civilian population to

support friendly force efforts IVO

Valleyville.

T-2 – Broadcast radio messages

about friendly forces conducting

joint training with NORTHLAND

defense forces.

P-2 – Influence DAKOTIAN forces

to depart Valleyville.

T-1 – Create billboard IVO Freeway

101 en route to decoy rally point.

P-1 – Influence DAKOTIAN forces

to no longer support

mission/leadership.

T-2 – Broadcast radio messages

about NORTHLAND civilian support

for friendly force.

P-2 – Influence DAKOTIAN forces

to depart Valleyville.

T-1 – Broadcast radio and TV

messages about friendly force support

to NORTHLAND defense and

rebuilding civilian infrastructure.

P-1 – Influence civilian population to

support friendly force efforts IVO

Valleyville.

T-1 – CA contact team begins

support to rebuild civilian

infrastructure IVO Valleyville.

P-1 – Reinforce narrative that

friendly forces are

NORTHLAND allies and are

enabling NORTHLAND self-

governance.

MCWP 5-10

DECEPTION

T-1 – Establish decoy rally point to

the West IVO Freeway 101.

T-2 – Establish pattern-of-life with

personnel and equipment at decoy

rally point.

P-1 – Deceive ENY by presenting a

credible threat to ENY forces from

the decoy rally point.

T-1 – Conduct a feint attack to the

West IVO Freeway 101.

T-2 – Limit C2 transmissions from

feinting force.

P-1 – Influence 1st Corps CDR to

commit forces to the West IVO

Freeway 101.

T-1 – Terminate decoy rally point and

feint force return to base.

P-1 – Reconstitute ground forces IVO

assembly area.

INFORM

T-1 – Coordinate NORTHLAND

media outlets’ reporting on CA

engagement with local politicians.

P-1 – Inform foreign and domestic

audiences of friendly force efforts to

support NORTHLAND infrastructure

development projects.

T-2 – Release images or social

media posts at least every six hours

showing friendly force training with

NORHTLAND forces.

P-2 – Inform NORTHLAND

audiences that friendly forces are

supporting NORTHLAND forces

against DAKOTIAN aggression.

T-3 – Release images or social

media posts at least every six hours

showing friendly force support to

local population.

P-3 – Reinforce narrative that

friendly forces are enabling

NORTHLAND self-governance.

T-4 – Release news story and

photos to domestic

NORTHLANDIAN communities in

the US showing friendly force

conducting partnered training

operations with NORTHLAND

defense forces.

P-4 – Inform domestic audiences

with ties to NORTHLAND about

narratives for friendly force support

to NORTHLAND.

T-1 -- Release images or social

media posts at least every six hours

showing friendly force support to

local population.

P-1 – Reinforce narrative that

friendly forces are enabling

NORTHLAND self-governance.

T-2 – Release images or social

media posts at least every six hours

showing friendly force training with

NORHTLAND forces.

P-2 – Counter DAKOTIAN

misinformation / disinformation

efforts and inform NORTHLAND

audiences that friendly forces are

supporting NORTHLAND forces

against DAKOTIAN aggression.

T-1 -- Release images or social media

posts at least every six hours showing

friendly force support to local

population.

P-1 – Reinforce narrative that friendly

forces are enabling NORTHLAND self-

governance.

T-2 – Release images or social media

posts at least every six hours showing

friendly force training with

NORHTLAND forces.

P-2 – Counter DAKOTIAN

misinformation / disinformation efforts

and inform NORTHLAND audiences

that friendly forces are supporting

NORTHLAND forces against

DAKOTIAN aggression.

T-1 – Coordinate

NORTHLAND media outlets’

reporting on CA engagement

with local politicians.

P-1 – Inform foreign and

domestic audiences of

friendly force efforts to

support NORTHLAND

infrastructure development

projects.

T-2 -- Release images or

social media posts at least

every six hours showing

friendly force support to local

population.

P-2 – Reinforce narrative that

friendly forces are enabling

NORTHLAND self-

governance.

T-3 – Release news story and

photos to domestic

NORTHLANDIAN

communities in the US

showing friendly force

conducting partnered training

operations with NORTHLAND

defense forces.

P-3 – Inform domestic

audiences with ties to

NORTHLAND about

narratives for friendly force

support to NORTHLAND.

Logistics

Trans

Adequate transportation assets are

available for resupply.

BPT support Regt-sized movement

from XXX to YYY.

Move EPWs as directed.

Supply

Ensure adequate stockages

available for resupply.

Establish RRP under I, III, V.

Gen Engr

BPT support construction of EPW

facilities.

BPT support construction of EPW

facilities.

BPT support construction of

EPW facilities.

Maint

Ensure required readiness levels

are established.

Priority to GCE.

"Maintenance Standdown"

Marine Corps Planning Process

HSS

Ensure Role I and II facilites are

established.

Establish forward Role II sites as

required.

Establish forward Role II sites as

required.

BPT treat civilian casualties.

Establish forward Role II sites

as required.

BPT treat civilian casualties.

Services

Coordinate port handling with US

Army logistics

Provide combat replacement

companies as required

Coordinate with JFC withhold shipping

Arrange for MPF

reconstitution

Command and Control

Forward

Establish C2 node north of Clayton

pass along MSR RED IVO

Valleyville.

Establish C2 node north of Clayton

pass along MSR RED IVO Valleyville.

Maintain MEF(FWD)

communications established

in either Stage A or B.

Provide retransmission sites

to MARDIV(FWD) as

required.

Main

COC established at XXX.

Establish retransmission sites (as

needed) to maintain connectivity

with MARDIV(FWD). Maintain rear

area communications with 3d MAW

and 1st MLG.

Establish retransmission sites (as

needed) to maintain connectivity with

MARDIV(FWD). Maintain rear area

communications with 3d MAW and 1st

MLG.

Establish retransmission sites

(as needed) to maintain

connectivity with

MARDIV(FWD). Maintain

rear area communications

with 3d MAW and 1st MLG.

Rear

BPT establish C2 node.

Retrans

BPT establish IVO MARDIV MAIN

to maintain MEF connectivity with

FWD.

BPT displace as required to maintain

terrestrial data communications with

MARDIV(FWD).

BPT displace as required to

maintain terrestrial data

communications with

MARDIV(FWD).

Force

Protection

TF Guardian

(RACOM)

T- Assume RACOM at D-6.

T - SECURE critical sites and

GLOCs in MEF rear area.

P - PROTECT critical requirements

to include personnel, supplies,

equipment, and facilities.

T - SECURE critical sites and

GLOCs in MEF rear area.

P - PROTECT critical requirements

to include personnel, supplies,

equipment, and facilities.

T - SECURE critical sites and GLOCs

in MEF rear area.

P - PROTECT critical requirements to

include personnel, supplies,

equipment, and facilities.

T - SECURE critical sites and

GLOCs in MEF rear area.

P - PROTECT critical

requirements to include

personnel, supplies,

equipment, and facilities.

EPWs

Identify location of temporary

collection facility IOT facilitate the

processing of EPWs. As GCE

identifies forward EPW collection

points coordinate EPW exchange.

Move EPWs to a temporary holding

facility in rear area. Coordinate the

movement of EPWs to permanent

detention facility.

Identify location of temporary

collection facility IOT facilitate the

processing of EPWs. As GCE

identifies forward EPW collection

points coordinate EPW exchange.

Move EPWs to a temporary holding

facility in rear area. Coordinate the

movement of EPWs to a permanent

detention facility.

Identify location of temporary collection

facility IOT facilitate the processing of

EPWs. As GCE identifies forward EPW

collection points coordinate EPW

exchange. Move EPWs to a temporary

holding facility in rear area. Coordinate

the movement of EPWs to a

permanent detention facility.

Identify location of temporary

collection facility IOT facilitate

the processing of EPWs. As

GCE identifies forward EPW

collection points coordinate

EPW exchange. Move EPWs

to a temporary holding facility

in rear area. Coordinate the

movement of EPWs to a

permanent detention facility.

MIG

LE Bn route control WRT IDPs.

Set up temporary EPW facilities.

LE Bn route control WRT IDPs.

Set up temporary EPW facilities.

SUPPORT the

reestablishment of the rule of

law.

BPT partner with

NORTHLAND law

enforcement agencies.

Legend

AD airborne division

EW/C early warning/control

MEF Marine expeditionary force

ADA air defense artillery

FARP forward arming and refueling point

MID mechanized infantry division

BCL battlefield coordination line

FP force protection

MIG Marine expeditionary force information group

BDE brigade

FSCM fire support coordination measure

MILDEC military deception

Bn battalion

FWD forward

MISO military information support operations

BPT beach party team

GCE ground combat element

MLG Marine logistics group

MCWP 5-10

Btry battery

GEN ENG general engineering

MSR main supply route

C2 command and control

GLOC ground line of communications

NAI named area of interest

CA civil affairs

Gov’t government

OBJ objective

CAG civil affairs group

GPS Global Positioning System

OCO offensive cyberspace operations

CATK counterattack

HHQ higher headquarters

OPSEC operations security

CDR commander

HPT high-payoff target

P purpose

CF conventional forces

HSS health service support

RACOM rear area commander

CFACC combined force air component commander

HUMINT human intelligence

Recon reconnaissance

CFMCC combined force maritime component

commander

I&W indications and warnings

Regt regiment

IDP internally displaced person

RIP relief in place

CI counterintelligence

IMINT imagery intelligence

RRP repair and replenishment point

COC combat operations center

Intel intelligence

SIGINT signals intelligence

COMMSTRAT communication strategy and operations

IOT in order to

SOF special operations forces

CSS combat service support

ISO in support of

sync synchronize

DAG division artillery group

IVO in the vicinity of

T task

DAK Dakotian

LE law enforcement

TF task force

DCO defensive cyberspace operations

Maint maintenance

TOA transfer of authority

Div division

MARDIV Marine division

Trans transportation

ENY enemy

MAW Marine aircraft wing

UAS unmanned aircraft system

EPW enemy prisioner of war

Mech mechanized

WMD weapons of mass destruction

EW electronic warfare

Course of Action War Game Worksheet

The COA war game worksheet (see table D-6) is used during the war game to record friendly

action, enemy/adversary reaction, and friendly counteraction involved in each COA. It is also used

to capture critical information that may be identified during the war game, such as potential CCIRs,

decision points, and NAIs.

Table D-6. Course of Action War Game Worksheet.

COA 1, STAGE A; BOX: MOST LIKELY

Action

Reaction

Counteraction

Assets

Approximate

Time

CCIR

Remarks

MARDIV envel-

ops Orangeland

forces north of

Gray City.

102d

and 103d

Armored

Brigades

counterattack.

MAW interdicts moving

enemy forces.

MARDIV engages and

destroys enemy armor at

long range.

Surge MAW attack

assets to interdict

enemy armor.

D+3

DP 3

Will 102d

and 103d

Armored Brigades

move west to

counterattack.

MARDIV has

priority of close

air support.

Legend

DP decision point

MARDIV Marine division

MAW Marine aircraft wing

Marine Corps Planning Process

Course of Action Comparison and Decision Matrix

The COA comparison and decision matrix is a planning support tool designed to assist the

commander and staff in recording the advantages and disadvantages of each COA as it is compared

against the commander’s evaluation criteria. It also provides a venue for further discussion. It may

reflect various techniques for weighing the COA against the commander’s evaluation criteria, as

shown in table D-7. The commander may use the COA comparison and decision matrix to aid the

decision-making process during the selection of a COA for execution. Commanders and staffs

should guard against relying on numerical “rankings” or other simplistic methods that can fail to

underscore the complexity involved in the decision-making process.

Table D-7. Comparison and Decision Matrix with Comments.

Commander’s

Evaluation Criteria

COA

Force protection

Moderate casualties.

High casualties.

Increased chemical, biological,

radiological, and nuclear threat.

Light casualties.

Tempo, surprise

Achieving surprise unlikely

High chance of achieving surprise.

Shapes the battlespace

ACE interdiction of enemy lines of

communications limits enemy’s

ability to reinforce.

Deception likely to be effective.

Asymmetrical operations

ACE operates against second

echelon armor forces.

GCE mechanized forces attack

enemy dismounted infantry.

MEF mechanized forces against

enemy mechanized forces.

Maneuver

Frontal attack followed by

penetration.

Limited to frontal attack.

Turning movement.

Decisive actions

ACE disrupts deployment of second

echelon forces through interdiction.

Isolate first echelon forces.

Disrupt lines of communica- tions,

logistic facilities, and assembly areas.

Simplicity

Simplest

Demanding command and

coordination requirements.

Legend

GCE ground combat element

MCWP 5-10

Table D-8. OPORD Assignment Matrix.

Document

Title

Responsible POC

Billet

Action Officer

Billet

BASIC ORDER

Annex A.

Task Organization

Appendix A-1

Time-Phased Force Deployment List

Appendix A-2

Shortfall Identification

Appendix A-3

Flexible Response and Flexible Deterrent Options

Annex B.

Intelligence

Appendix B-1

Priority Intelligence Requirements

Appendix B-2

Signals Intelligence

Tab B-2-A

Communications Intelligence Collection Requirements

Tab B-2-B

Operational Electronic Intelligence Collection Requirements

Appendix B-3

Counterintelligence

Tab B-3-A

Counterintelligence Target List

Tab B-3-B

Multidiscipline Counterintelligence Threat Report

Tab B-3-C

Designation of Theater Counterintelligence Executive Agency

Appendix B-4

Targeting Intelligence

Tab B-4-A

Target List (Conventional)

Tab B-4-B

Network Targeting (nonlethal actions against friendly and neutral

networks and nodes)

Appendix B-5

Human Resource Intelligence

Tab B-5-A

HUMINT Operations Cell Operations

Tab B-5-B

EPW/Civilian Detainees

Appendix B-6

Intelligence Support to Operations in the Information

Environment

Appendix B-7

Imagery Intelligence

Appendix B-8

Measurement and Signature Intelligence

Appendix B-9

Captured Enemy Equipment

Tab B-9-A

Specific Prioritized Intelligence Collection Requirements

Tab B-9-B

Equipment Releasable for Operational Purposes

Tab B-9-C

Network Analysis

Appendix B-10

National Intelligence Support Team

Appendix B-11

Intelligence Estimate

Appendix B-12

Intelligence Products

Appendix B-13

Intelligence Collection Plan

Tab B-13-A

Signals Intelligence Employment Plan

Tab B-13-B

Counterintelligence/ Human Source Intelligence Employment

Plan

Appendix B-14

Reconnaissance and Surveillance Plan

Tab B-14-A

Ground Reconnaissance and Surveillance Plan

Tab B-14-B

Sensor Surveillance Plan

Exhibit B-14-B-1

Sensor Implant Plan

Exhibit B-14-B-2

Sensor Employment Plan

Exhibit B-14-B-3

Sensor Monitoring and Dissemination Plan

Marine Corps Planning Process

Table D-8. OPORD Assignment Matrix.

Document

Title

Responsible POC

Billet

Action Officer

Billet

Exhibit B-14-B-4

Sensor Resources

Appendix B-15

Geographic Intelligence

Appendix B-16

Intelligence Operations

Appendix B-17

Support to Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape

Annex C.

Operations

Appendix C-1

Nuclear Operations

Appendix C-2

Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Defense

Operations

Appendix C-3

Special Operations

Legend

CBRN chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear

Col colonel

CWO 4 chief warrant officer 4

Det detachment

HUMINT human intelligence

LDR leader

LtCol lieutenant colonel

Maj major

Ops operations

Table D-9. Liaison Plan.

MEF LNO Plan

LNO TO MEF

LNO FROM MEF

UNIT FROM

BILLET

RANK

NAME

UNIT TO

BILLET

RANK

NAME

DIV

DIV LNO

LTCOL

SMITH

JTF HQ

MEF LNO

LTCOL

HARDY

ACE

ACE LNO

MAJ

BROWN

Doctors w/o

Borders

MEF LNO

CAPT

BLACK

MLG

DIV LNO

LTCOL

ELROD

Centralian Gov’t

MEF LNO

COL

JONES

TF WEST

TF WEST LNO

LTC

MOORE

TF WEST

MEF LNO

MAJ

PAIN

TF EAST

TF EAST LNO

LCDR

ROW

TF EAST

MEF LNO

MAJ

MAY

Legend

Capt captain

Col colonel

Div division

Gov’t government

HQ headquarters

JTF joint task force

LCDR lieutenant commander (Navy)

LNO liaison officer

LTC lieutenant colonel (Army)

LtCol lieutenant colonel

Maj major

MLG Marine logistics group

TF task force

w/o without

MCWP 5-10

Table D-10. Planning and Execution Timeline.

Planning and Execution Timeline

Day

Time

Event

Location

Attends?

Notes

D Day

Execution

D-1

Unit Movement to AA

D-3

Unit Rehearsals

D-4

Transition Brief

MSC COs required to brief

D-5

Transition Event Rehearsal

MSC OpsOs required

Transition Event Preparation

Lead: G-3 Ops chief

MSC Confirmation Brief

OPT lead will send template

to MSC OpsOs; MSC COs

brief

D-7

OPORD Published

D-8

CG Signature on OPORD

Staff Review & Feedback of OPORD

OPORD Draft Complete

OPORD Crosswalk

OPORD Reconciliation

D-10

Complete OPORD

COA Comparison and Decision Brief

Preparation

COA Comparison and Decision Brief

OPT Work

D-12

COA Wargaming Brief

COA Wargaming Brief Prep

COA Wargaming Brief OPT Work

D-13

COA War Game

COA War Game Preparation

Order 10 ft x 20 ft map

POC: Capt X for set-up

COA War Game OPT Work

D-16

COA Development Brief

COA Development Brief Preparation

COA Development Brief OPT Work

Operational Approach Discussion

Marine Corps Planning Process

Table D-10. Planning and Execution Timeline (Continued).

D-19

Problem Framing Brief

Problem Framing Brief Preparation

D-20

Problem Framing OPT Work

WARNORD Issued

SIPRNET; must identify way

to send to coalition TACON

units

Design Discussion

D-22

Commander's Orientation

AC/S G-3: BPT lead

discussion

Form OPT

Identify OPT Membership and

Requirements

D-23

Identify OPT Leader

Legend

AA avenue of approach

AC/S assistant chief of staff

BPT beach party team

Capt captain

CG commanding general

CO commanding officer

ft feet

MSC major subordinate command

Ops operations

OpsO operations officer

SIPRNET SECRET Internet Protocol Router Network

TACON tactical control

PLANNING SUPPORT TOOLS FOR STABILITY OPERATIONS

The following planning support tools have emerged and evolved as a result of Operation Iraqi

Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom lessons learned. For detailed information on stability

operations, see MCWP 3-03, Stability Operations.

Civil Considerations

Civil considerations are a factor in all types of military operations, but they are of particular

significance in stability operations and security cooperation. If the mission is to support civil

authorities, civil considerations define the mission.

Civil considerations generally focus on the immediate impact of civilians on operations in

progress; however, they also include larger, long-term diplomatic, informational, and economic

issues at higher levels. Given the global and accelerated nature of information flows, civil

considerations must also take into account international audiences as well as American domestic

audiences. At the tactical level, they directly relate to key civil considerations within the area of

operations. The world’s increasing urbanization means that the attitudes and activities of the

civilian population in the area of operations often influence the outcome of military operations.

Civil considerations can either help or hinder friendly or enemy/adversary forces and will influence

the selection of a COA.

An appreciation of civil considerations—the ability to analyze their impact on operations—

enhances several aspects of operations, such as the selection of objectives; location, movement,

MCWP 5-10

and control of forces; use of weapons; and protection measures. Civil considerations comprise six

characteristics of ASCOPE: areas, structures, capabilities, organizations, people, and events. See

figure D-7.

Figure D-7. Sample Civil Considerations (ASCOPE).

Areas

Areas are key localities or aspects of the terrain within a commander’s operational environment

that are not normally thought of as militarily significant. Failure to consider key civil areas,

however, can seriously affect the success of any military mission.

Civil affairs Marines and civil-military operations planners analyze key civil areas from two

perspectives: how do these areas affect the military mission and how do military operations impact

civilian activities in these areas? At times, the answers to these questions may dramatically

influence major portions of the COAs under consideration.

Structures

Structures are architectural objects, such as bridges, communications towers, power plants, and

dams, and are often identified as traditional HPTs. Other structures, such as churches, mosques,

national libraries, and hospitals are cultural sites subject to protection by international law or other

agreements. Still other structures are facilities with practical applications, such as jails,

warehouses, schools, television stations, radio stations, and printing plants, which may be useful

for military purposes.

Structures analysis involves determining their location, functions, capabilities, capacity, and

application in support of military operations. It also involves weighing the military, political,

economic, religious, social, and informational consequences of removing them from civilian use;

the reaction of the populace; and replacement costs.

Marine Corps Planning Process

Capabilities

Civil capabilities can be viewed from several perspectives. The term capabilities may refer to—

 Existing capabilities of the populace to sustain themselves, such as through public

administration, public safety, emergency services, and food and agriculture systems.

 Capabilities with which the populace needs assistance, such as public works and utilities,

public health, public transportation, sanitation, economics, and commerce.

 Resources and services that can be contracted to support the military mission, such as

interpreters, laundry services, construction materials, and equipment. Local vendors, the host

nation, or other nations may provide these resources and services. Under a hostile threat

condition, civil capabilities include resources that may be taken and used by military forces

consistent with international law.

Analysis of the existing capabilities of the area of operations is normally conducted by personnel

with functional expertise in civil affairs or civil engineering. The analysis also identifies the

capabilities of partner countries and organizations involved in the operation. In doing so, civil-

military operations planners consider how to address shortfalls as well as how to capitalize on

capability strengths.

Organizations

Civil organizations are groups that may or may not affiliate with government agencies. They can

be religious groups, companies, patriotic or service organizations, community watch groups,

international organizations, or NGOs. Organizations can assist the commander in keeping the

populace informed of ongoing and future activities in an area of operations and influencing the

actions of the populace. Some of these organizations may also form the nucleus of humanitarian

assistance programs, interim governing bodies, civil defense efforts, and other population-centric

activities.

People

People, both individually and collectively, can have a positive, negative, or no impact on military

operations. The people element of ASCOPE includes civilians or nonmilitary personnel

encountered in an area of operations. The term may also extend to those outside the area of

operations whose actions, opinions, or political influence can affect the military mission. In all

military operations, US forces must be prepared to encounter and work closely with civilians of

all types. When analyzing people, Marines should consider historical, cultural, ethnic, political,

economic, and humanitarian factors. Working with the people assists Marines in identifying the

key communicators as well as the formal and informal processes used to influence people.

Regardless of the nature of the operation, military forces will usually encounter civilians living

and operating in and around the unit’s area of operations. Major categories of civilians likely to be

encountered include—

 Local nationals, such as town and city residents, farmers, other rural residents, and nomads.

MCWP 5-10

 Local civil authorities, such as elected and traditional leaders at all levels of government.

 Expatriates.

 Foreign government employees.

 Employees of international organizations and NGOs.

 US Government and third-nation government agency representatives.

 Contractors, who may be US citizens, local nationals, or third-nation citizens providing

contract services.

 DOD civilian employees.

 The media, including journalists from print, radio, and visual media.

Events

As there are many different categories of civilians, there are many categories of civilian events

that may affect the military mission. Some examples are planting and harvest seasons, elections,

riots, holidays, and voluntary and involuntary evacuations. Likewise, there are military events that

impact the lives of civilians in an area of operations. Some examples are combat operations,

including indirect fires, deployments, and redeployments. Civil-military operations planners

determine what events are occurring and analyze the events for their political, economic,

psychological, environmental, and legal implications.

APPENDIX E

DESIGN

XAMPLE

ITERATIVE DESIGN DURING OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM II

During Operation Iraqi Freedom II, 1st Marine Division employed design (see fig. E-1). The

Commanding General, Major General James N. Mattis, began with an assessment of the people

that the Marines, Soldiers, and Sailors would encounter within the division’s area of operations,

western Iraq’s Al Anbar province. Al Anbar possessed a considerably different demographic than

the imam-led Shia areas that dominated Operation Iraqi Freedom I operations.

Major General Mattis grouped Anbar provincial constituents into three basic groups: the tribes,

the former regime elements, and the foreign fighters. The tribes constituted the primary identity

group in Al Anbar. They had various internal tribal affiliations and looked to a diverse array of

sheiks and elders for leadership. The former regime elements were a minority that included

individuals with personal, political, business, and professional ties to the Ba’ath Party. These

included the civil servants and career military personnel with the skills to run government

institutions. Initially, they saw little gain from a democratic Iraq. The foreign fighters were a small

but dangerous minority of transnational Islamic jihadists. To be successful, US forces had to apply

a different approach to each of these groups within the framework of an overarching plan. As in

any society, some portion of each of these groups was composed of a criminal element, further

complicating planning and interaction. Major General Mattis’s “vision of resolution,” was

composed of two major elements encompassed in an overarching “bodyguard” of information

operations.

The first element, and the main effort, was reducing support for insurgency. Guided by the maxims

of “first do no harm” and “no better friend, no worse enemy,” the objective was to establish a

secure local environment for the indigenous population so people could pursue their economic,

social, cultural, and political well-being and achieve some degree of local normalcy. Establishing

a secure environment involved both offensive and defensive operations, with a heavy emphasis on

training and advising the security forces of the fledgling Iraqi government. It also included putting

the population to work. Simply put, an Iraqi with a job was less likely to succumb to ideological

or economic pressure to support the insurgency. Other tasks included the delivery of essential

services, economic development, and the promotion of governance, all geared toward increasing

employment opportunities and furthering the establishment of local normalcy. Essentially,

diminishing support for insurgency was about gaining and maintaining the support of the tribes,

as well as converting as many of the former regime members as possible. “Fence-sitters” were

considered a winnable constituency and addressed as such.

The second element involved neutralizing the enemy and/or adversary, a combination of

irreconcilable former regime elements and foreign fighters. Offensive combat operations were

MCWP 5-10

conducted to defeat disobedient former regime members. The task was to make those who were

not neutralized see the futility of resistance and give up the fight. With respect to the hard-core

extremists, who would never give up, the task was more straightforward: their complete and utter

destruction. Neutralizing the enemy supported the main effort by improving the local security

environment. Neutralization had to be accomplished discriminately, however, to avoid

unintentionally increasing support for insurgency.

Both elements described above were wrapped in an overarching “bodyguard” of information

operations. Information operations, both proactive and responsive, were aggressively employed to

favorably influence the populace’s perception of all coalition actions while discrediting the

insurgents. These tasks were difficult, as corruption was historically prevalent among Iraqi

officials, generating cynicism toward government. Decades of Arab media mischaracterization of

US actions created mistrust of US motives. The magnitude of that cynicism and doubt highlighted

the critical importance of using information operations to influence every situation.

In pursuing this “vision of resolution,” 1st Marine Division faced an adaptive enemy/adversary.

Persistent US presence and interaction with the populace threatened the insurgents and caused the

enemy/adversary to employ more open violence in selected areas of Al Anbar. This response

resulted in learning and adaptation within 1st Marine Division. Design enabled 1st Marine

Division to adjust the blend of “diminishing support for insurgents” and “neutralizing bad actors”

to meet local challenges. Throughout the operation, 1st Marine Division continued learning and

adapting with the espoused vision providing a constant guide to direct and unify the effort.

Note: The term “information operations” is a legacy term in this context

and was replaced by “operations in the information environment” in the Marine Corps.

Figure E-1. 1st Marine Division Design for Operation Iraqi Freedom II.

APPENDIX

STAFF ESTIMATES AND

ESTIMATES OF SUPPORTABILITY

Keeping commanders informed to facilitate their decision-making is a critical requirement of

planning. During planning, estimates are a primary means of informing the commander. The two

basic types of estimates are the staff estimate and the estimates of supportability.

Staff estimates are generally functional in nature, such as fires, logistics, or intelligence, and often

require subordinate unit information, such as the ACE’s sortie calculations. Staff estimates evolve

into supporting concepts as COAs are developed. Once the commander approves a COA, the staff

estimate and supporting concept become the first draft of their respective portion of the order or

plan. Estimates of supportability, especially estimates provided by attached, supporting, etc. units,

enable the commander and planners to better understand the capabilities, requirements, limitations,

and shortfalls of the particular unit.

Estimates may be text documents, slides, graphic representations, or an oral presentation of the

analysis and recommendations. These estimates enable commanders, staff, and planners to develop

a plan and develop complete COAs. Done properly, estimates contribute information to the

annexes and appendices to OPORDs and OPLANs.

Commanders and staffs use estimates as they collect, process, and evaluate information. A

subordinate unit or a staff section, upon discovering a fatal flaw, should not wait to complete a

document to raise concerns about a particular COA. The sooner the commander and planners know

of a problem, the sooner they can either discard or modify the COA. The key issue is time. Format

or formality should never delay the timely delivery of important information to the commander.

At a minimum, commanders and their staffs should update their estimates when their

understanding of the environment or problem changes, assumptions become invalid, new tasks are

received, and/or requirements or capabilities change.

STAFF ESTIMATES

The staff and warfighting function representatives develop staff estimates (see figs. F-1a through

F-1e). The staff summarizes significant aspects of the situation that influence the COA, analyzes

the impact of the factors on the COA, and evaluates and determines how the means available can

best support the COA. Staff sections may also require their functional representatives to develop

functional estimates within their areas of expertise. A staff estimate is not a replacement for an

order or for supporting concepts; however, a thorough staff estimate will shorten the time it takes

to fully develop a COA and write the order or plan.

MCWP 5-10

Figures F-1a through F-1e provide examples of staff estimates. The G-2, with input assistance

from all staff members, will also prepare and disseminate the IPB as a separate and continuously

updated product.

Figure F-1a. Notional G-2 Staff Estimate.

Figure F-1b. Notional G-3 Staff Estimate.

Figure F-1c. Notional

Information Environment Staff Estimate.

Figure F-1d. Notional G-6 Staff Estimate.

Figure F-1e. Notional G-4 Staff Estimate.

Marine Corps Planning Process

ESTIMATES OF SUPPORTABILITY

Estimates of supportability are produced by subordinate commanders or their planners to assist the

higher commander with planning. Estimates of supportability are especially important for attached,

supporting units. Figure F-2 provides an example of an estimates of supportability.

Figure F-2. Notional Estimate of Supportability.

MCWP 5-10

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

APPENDIX

RED TEAM

This appendix describes red team principles and provides perspectives for the employment of red

teams and red-teaming techniques in the MCPP. See MCBUL [Marine Corps Bulletin] 3510/C461,

Marine Corps Red Team Policy.

Red teams, like red cells, have direct application to planning and provide commanders with an

independent capability to fully explore alternatives in plans, operations, concepts, organizations,

and capabilities in the context of the operational environment. Red teams also provide the

perspectives of partners, enemy/adversaries, and others, vice that of the planning organization and

of Western military thought in general. People and organizations court failure in predictable ways,

by degrees, almost imperceptibly, and according to their own culture and context. As a

countermeasure, Marines can fully explore alternatives in that context and from differing

perspectives.

Red teams can apply at all levels of warfare, across the range of military operations, and during all

phases of operations. Red teams challenge the OPT’s understanding of the problems and the

environment, as well as assumptions. Red teams also seek to qualify the assumptions, develop

targeted cultural questions, propose alternative perspectives, and identify any cognitive biases or

instances of groupthink.

Red teams succeed when they help commanders and staffs avoid complacency and consider a

wider range of perspectives and COAs. All planners and analysts endeavor to think critically,

consider alternatives, and avoid bias and error. However, red teams are distinguished by their—

 Independence that helps them view problems and processes from detached perspectives.

 Specialized training that helps them identify and counter biases and stimulate critical and

creative thought.

 Purposeful out-of-the-box approach to problems that helps them consider issues with fewer

concessions to convention, policy, established community positions, and functional

specialization.

Red teams participate in each phase of the planning process, often without overt intervention and

while remaining largely in the background. Commanders may direct alternate approaches. Red

teams identify unseen opportunities, alternatives, gaps, vulnerabilities, and threats to the friendly

COAs that may generate development of additional branches and sequels not previously

considered. Separate, discrete red team briefs and discussions may better serve the commander.

The red team’s communication skills and finesse will determine its effectiveness during planning.

Red teams can be a useful tool, but their existence does not relieve planning teams of their

responsibility to think critically about their plan from multiple perspectives.

MCWP 5-10

100

Figure G-1: Three Red Team Focus Areas.

Red Team Tools Within the Marine Corps Planning Process

Red teams help establish an initial hypothesis about the character of the friendly, adversarial, and

wider environmental factors which define the situation. Red teams also explore cultural narratives,

institutional histories, propensities, and strategic trends to postulate a general structure of the

factors and their relationships to the problem. Red team contributions to the planning process as

well as details for the development of the red team tools and products are discussed below. See

figure G-2.

Figure G-2: Red Team Tools Within the Marine Corps Planning Process.

Marine Corps Planning Process

101

Problem Framing

The purpose of problem framing is to achieve a greater understanding of the environment and the

nature of the problem set to identify an appropriate conceptual solution. The red team, or red team

techniques, contributes to the design methodology by reinforcing the effort to frame the correct

problem. While not prescriptive or a checklist, design is based on—

 Critical thinking.

 Conceptual planning.

 Visualization.

 Emergence of a hypothesis.

 Continuous activity.

For the red team, critical thinking is purposeful and reflective judgment on what to do in response

to observations, experience, verbal or written expressions, or arguments. Critical thinking involves

the high-order cognitive skills of analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Critical thinkers are often

open-minded yet skeptical individuals who: gather, assess, and interpret relevant information;

question their own assumptions; and, consider the quality of information and the associated

implications and consequences.

Red teams gain perspective by using multiple tools. Commanders and planners can leverage many

of these tools, some of which include:—

 Four Ways of Seeing. Using multiple lenses, commanders and planners can reveal challenges

to mission accomplishment and heighten understanding. These lenses include: how friendly

forces view themselves; how the enemy/adversary views themselves; how the

enemy/adversary views friendly forces; and, how friendly forces view the enemy/adversary.

 Key Assumption Check. The red team can play a key role in validating assumptions and may,

therefore, undertake a systematic effort to question the assumptions that guide an analyst’s

interpretation of evidence and the reasoning underlying any particular judgment or conclusion.

 Frame Audit. A tool to help identify more useful frames and reframe an issue in more useful

ways.

Red teams may present their products as part of the problem framing brief or at a separate time.

Course of Action Development

Red teams provide options for commanders by an approach to solve the problem from an alternate

perspective. Red teams make independent assessments of possible COAs, while identifying and

addressing catastrophic points of failure and utilizing available internal and external resources.

Red teams provide independent validation of the suitability, feasibility, acceptability, and

completeness of the COAs. Red team tools for COA development include—

 Team A / Team B. A competitive analysis that pits Team A against Team B.

 Premortem analysis. A red team strategy in which the red team imagines that a project or

organization has failed and then works backward to determine what potentially could lead to

MCWP 5-10

102

the failure of the project or organization. The technique breaks possible groupthinking by

facilitating a positive discussion on threats, increasing the likelihood of identifying the main

threats. The red team can then analyze the magnitude and likelihood of each threat to

recommend preventive actions to protect the project or organization from suffering an untimely

failure.

 Devil’s advocate. Advocating an opposing or unpopular cause for the sake of argument or to

expose it to a thorough examination.

 Stakeholder mapping. Identifying and understanding key stakeholders, where they come from,

and what they are looking for in relationship to your operation.

Red team products may be briefed with the OPT’s COA development products or separately.

Course of Action War Game

The red teams assist with the examination and refinement of options in light of enemy/adversary

capabilities and potential actions and reactions. They also examines other factors specific to the

operational environment, such as the local population and how it may respond to friendly and

enemy/adversary interactions. While planners are wargaming friendly COAs against selected

enemy/adversary COAs through an iterative action-reaction-counteraction process, red teams

focus their efforts on the examination of the risk inherent to each COA to find alternative ways to

minimize risk. Red teams work independently from the OPT and their tools include—

 Devil’s advocate.

 Functional systems approach. Conceptualizing everyday concepts as an interconnected

dynamic system rather than as separate processes.

 Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats analysis. This analysis is a framework that adds

value by essentially forcing the red team to think through the various perspectives of a given

situation using different situations and actors. Doing so helps the red team attain alternative

perspectives and a more holistic view of the environment.

Red teams may brief their products and assessment as part of the COA war game brief or in a

separate discussion with the commander.

Course of Action Comparison and Decision

Red teams examine the synchronization matrix and identify possible catastrophic points of failure.

In addition, red teams conduct independent assessments for the commander as required or

instructed utilizing the following tools:

 Devil’s advocate.

 Key assumptions check.

 Analysis of competing hypotheses. A methodology for evaluating multiple competing

hypotheses (suppositions or proposed explanations made on the basis of limited evidence as a

starting point for further investigation) for observed data.

Marine Corps Planning Process

103

The dialogue during the COA comparison and decision step represents a continuation of the design

effort. Red teams offer differing perspectives to deepen the group’s understanding of the

environment and the problem.

Orders Development

Red teams assist commanders by ensuring the OPORD is useful, realistic, and can be understood

by all audiences.

Red teams utilize the following tools to assist during this step of the process:

 Analysis of competing hypotheses.

 Cultural perception framework. A conceptual framework of the different mechanisms by which

culture conditions perception and cognition.

 Divergent/convergent analysis. The use of divergent and convergent modes of thought—

generating and taking seriously alternative possibilities, even comparing and contrasting

alternative models and types of analysis, and yet in the end offering a reasonable (and

reasonably definitive) conclusion.

Transition

Transition occurs at all levels of command. A formal transition normally occurs on staffs with

separate planning and execution teams. For transition to occur, an approved order or plan must

exist. The approved order or plan and the products of continuing staff actions form the input for

transition. Red teams conduct an independent assessment of overall mission requirements and

commander’s intent.

Red teams utilize the following tools to assist during this step:

 Four ways of seeing.

 Outside-in thinking. Harnesses insight about the external environment to make the most

intelligent choices about where to compete and how to win the competition. The primary role

of this tool is to create an intense focus on the few things that matter most for the achievement

of competitive advantage.

 5 Whys. An iterative interrogative technique used to explore the cause-and-effect relationships

underlying a particular problem.

MCWP 5-10

104

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

APPENDIX

RAPID RESPONSE PLANNING

ROCESS

The goal of the R2P2 is to spend less time planning in order to provide the executing forces with

the maximum time allowable to prepare for the mission. When circumstances impose severe time

constraints on the executing command, the commander and the staff must allocate enough time to

develop a feasible COA, time to coordinate critical details, and time to prepare for execution. The

commander and the staff must be thoroughly familiar with potential contingencies or missions and

the individuals involved with planning must know their roles in the planning process. Successful

rapid planning is predicated on—

 Significant MCPP knowledge and experience.

 Detailed preparation, training, and organization of the force and equipment.

 Intelligence and mission planning products developed previously.

 Current intelligence information.

 Refined, well-rehearsed SOPs.

If rapid planning is to be successful, both mission planning and preparation requirements are

conducted concurrently. The speed with which a unit can plan an operation varies with the

complexity of the mission, the experience of the commander and the staff, and METT-T factors.

The R2P2 was developed to enable the MEU to plan and commence execution of certain tasks

within 6 hours. The rapid planning techniques discussed in this appendix focus on the MEU and

its 6-hour timeline, but these techniques may be tailored and employed to meet other unit’s needs.

Rapid planning by non-MEU units is usually more effective when conducting routine missions or

tasks for which the unit has been well trained and has established SOPs.

ACTIONS PRIOR TO RAPID PLANNING

To best employ the R2P2, a unit must develop capabilities in four areas—integrated planning cells,

planning and operations SOPs, intelligence, and information management. If one of these areas is

lacking, effective rapid planning may not be achieved.

Integrated Planning Cells

The amount of staff turnover in the planning cells, to include the commander, directly impacts the

staff ’s ability to plan rapidly; therefore, the composition and membership of the various planning

cells used in rapid planning should remain constant, especially during the predeployment training

program and deployment of the MEU and amphibious ready group (ARG). The planning cells

employed by the MEU and ARG usually include the CAT, the battlestaff, and the mission planning

cells. These cells must participate in frequent planning exercises that involve scenarios similar to

those the unit might encounter. These exercises ensure the CAT, battlestaff, and mission planning

cells are thoroughly trained in rapid planning; their members know their commanders and each

MCWP 5-10

106

other; and the planners possess situational awareness of likely contingency missions and areas of

operation. Planning cells should understand where they are to meet, what they are to accomplish,

and how much time they have to complete their planning efforts. The planning cells also must be

capable of conducting concurrent (simultaneous at different echelons of the same command) and

parallel (between equivalent echelons of different commands) planning.

Planning and Operations

Standing Operating Procedures

The SOPs are the cornerstone of rapid planning. The planning SOP should be second nature to all

concerned. Operations SOPs are equally important because they allow planners to select proven

and practiced tasks that provide solutions to tactical problems. The SOPs allow major subordinate

elements (MSEs) to carry out familiar tasks effectively and efficiently with minimal or no higher-

level guidance or communications. The SOP for each type of mission should include a

predesignated task organization, equipment and ordnance lists, elements of a landing plan, mission

execution procedures, and an execution checklist with code words.

The SOPs must be current, studied, rehearsed, executable on a moment’s notice, and supported by

timesaving factors. For example, standard ordnance packages for likely missions, such as TRAP

or a platoon-sized reinforcement, are prestaged in readily accessable locations in their magazines

to reduce the time needed to break out and issue ammunition. In addition, mission smart packs are

created for each mission profile. Smart packs contain specific planning information and SOPs

based on the mission profile, such as for a light, medium, or heavy helicopter raid. Smart pack

planning and coordination of information are also used as references during mission execution.

Intelligence

The commander and the staff must anticipate possible contingencies based on continual analyses

of open-source news and classified intelligence reports. For each situation, the staff should be

equipped with the latest intelligence (a MEU usually prepares mission folders), possible targets,

area studies, and other relevant information. Periodic reviews of potential contingencies permits

situational awareness to be maintained and provides current information. When appropriate, a

commander conducts contingency planning and refocuses unit training based on likely scenarios.

The intelligence staff must also be familiar with the Generic Intelligence Requirements Handbook

(GIRH), which is produced by Marine Corps Intelligence Activity. This handbook contains

essential elements of information for various mission types.

Information Management

Due to the time constraints inherent in rapid planning, there is less opportunity for the commander

and the staff to analyze information requirements. Also, the growth of technology greatly increased

the speed and volume of information flow, so an overabundance of information may obscure vital

facts. It is critical that each participant in the planning process realizes the importance of his/her

mission area and takes positive steps to appropriately share knowledge. Commanders and staff

Marine Corps Planning Process

107

officers must possess the ability to present clear and concise information. Simple, concise

presentations best support rapid planning.

COMPOSITION OF MARINE EXPEDITIONARY UNIT PLANNING CELLS

Crisis Action Team

The central planning cell in the MEU and ARG is the CAT. Although the CAT’s final composition

depends on the commander and METT-T, the basic composition is established in the command

SOP. Three factors to consider in determining membership in the CAT are the physical space

available to accommodate the group, the benefits of additional input from a wider array of

functional areas, and the drawbacks of too many participants. The CAT members may include the

MEU and ARG commanders and their primary staffs, MSE commanders and their operations

officers, and SMEs. Some MEUs interchangeably refer to the CAT or the landing force operations

center watch team as the battlestaff.

Battlestaff

Some MEU and ARG commanders employ a battlestaff. The battlestaff may consist of staff

officers at the MEU, ARG, and MSE levels, plus representatives from attachments and functional

areas not included in the CAT. Ideally, any potential member of a mission planning cell not part

of the CAT should be on the battlestaff. The battlestaff convenes whenever the CAT is established,

which provides leaders and planners an opportunity to gain identical situational awareness with

the CAT and to prepare for participation in any mission planning cell. Because there are

insufficient personnel in some functional areas to staff all mission planning cells simultaneously,

the battlestaff may have members that support more than one mission planning cell.

Mission Planning Cell

Early in the planning process, the MEU and ARG commanders designate a mission commander,

usually one of the MSE commanders. The mission commander then establishes the mission

planning cell to plan the details of the operation. Consideration must be given to the feasibility of

separate planning cells due to limited staff members; therefore, the mission commander may

designate more than one planning cell in order to plan concurrent, contingency, or follow-on

missions. Additionally, a separate reconnaissance and surveillance (R&S) mission planning cell

may plan R&S operations.

Each mission planning cell should include appropriate representation from relevant experts. For

example, a battalion landing team planning cell might include air and logistic SMEs and Navy

representatives. Maintaining the same personnel in the planning cells throughout the work-up and

deployment speeds and improves the planning process. For example, if the ACE is the primary

mission commander for a TRAP, then the ground combat element should send the same

representative to all TRAP planning meetings.

MCWP 5-10

108

The planning cell’s working spaces must be pre-designated so all cell members know where to

report and to ensure no two cells are competing for the same space. Lower echelon units, such as

companies and platoons, must be prepared to plan concurrently with the mission planning cells

and have a designated planning space.

MARINE EXPEDITIONARY UNIT RAPID RESPONSE PLANNING PROCESS

The R2P2 is a time-constrained, six-step process that mirrors the MCPP. The six steps of R2P2

are—

 Problem framing

 COA development

 COA war game

 COA comparison and decision

 Orders development

 Transition

Problem Framing

Effective problem framing is achieved through prior familiarization with both the situation and the

type of mission and reliance on intuitive decision-making, which emphasizes rapid recognition of

patterns based on experience, training, and education. Planning times can be shortened if the MEU

and ARG perform anticipatory planning for various contingencies.

Upon receipt and acknowlegement of a WARNORD or an OPORD, the commander or a

designated individual establishes the CAT. The MEU and ARG commanders may retain or

delegate the authority to establish a CAT to their operations officers or the MEU executive officer

and the ARG chief of staff. The decision to establish the CAT is passed immediately to the other

ships. If it is a standard mission covered by an SOP, the initiation of SOP-based cross-decking

may occur.

Designated personnel in the landing force operations center watch section produce copies of the

order for the CAT and battlestaff/mission planning cells and ensure planning spaces are prepared

for use. The CAT and battlestaff/mission planning cells assemble in their respective spaces. These

spaces should be selected or identified in the SOP to prevent conflicts; for example, the battlestaff

is to assemble in the wardroom during meal hours. The CAT and battlestaff/mission planning cells

should be in their spaces and have copies of the WARNORD as soon as possible.

Designated staff personnel begin obtaining updated personnel and equipment status reports.

Ideally, these reports are collected in a manner that avoids distracting planners from the planning

process, such as outside the planning cells or on status boards in the planning spaces.

The MEU operations officer serves as the facilitator of the CAT and calls the group to order. A

designated recorder takes roll or members check-in with the recorder upon their arrival. The CAT

determines if there is a need for clarification during problem framing. If so, a designated staff

Marine Corps Planning Process

109

member, who is not involved in the CAT, requests clarification from HHQ. The CAT confirms

cross-deck requirements and considers the need for SMEs based on the nature of the mission. For

example, if the mission involves a raid on a chemical weapons site, the CAT may include a

chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear defense officer. If expertise in a critical area is

lacking, the CAT may initiate the process of obtaining reachback expertise. The meteorology

officer provides the latest weather information. The MEU S-2 and the ARG N-2 provide an

intelligence update. The division of labor between these two officers should be clearly stated in

the SOP to avoid overlap. The entire CAT then conducts problem framing in the same manner as

the MCPP. Specifically—

 MEU and ARG commanders gain an understanding of the environment and the problem

identified during problem framing. This understanding is essential to the development of a

commander’s concept.

 Time-constrained units should have their IPB products ready prior to starting the planning

process. During problem framing, these products are updated if time permits. If IPB products

are not available, the staff generates them.

 Rapid planning requires that SOPs are already understood. Units lacking well-rehearsed SOPs

require additional time in all of the planning steps, leading to a more deliberate, slower

planning process.

 The lack of “orientation” time associated with rapid planning may require an initial staff

orientation. A staff orientation informs the planners of previously unknown mission-related

facts.

The beginning of this phase depends, however, on whether and how the MEU and ARG

commanders use the battlestaff. The workings of the CAT may be viewed directly by the battlestaff

or the mission planning cells through video teleconferencing or a channel on the ship’s secure,

closed-circuit television, affording them the same situational awareness as the CAT. If the

battlestaff or mission planning cells do not have connectivity with the CAT, they can conduct their

own version of problem framing simultaneously with the CAT; however, the results of the CAT’s

problem framing must be provided to the battlestaff or the mission planning cells to ensure all

planners have the same situational awareness. Orientation of the staff occurs shortly after

completion of problem framing to allow the battlestaff or the appropriate mission planning cells

(identified during problem framing) to convene in their designated spaces.

The MEU and ARG commanders, beginning with the supporting commander, provide their

planning guidance to the CAT and the battlestaff/mission planning cells at the conclusion of

problem framing or any required staff orientation. A mission commander may be assigned at this

point. The supported commander follows with his/her intent; an assessment of COGs and critical

vulnerabilities; ongoing, standby, and follow-on mission priorities; COA considerations and/or

restrictions; timing; phasing; warfighting function considerations; and other significant

information that addresses planning for R&S as well as the main mission(s).

The commander’s guidance reflects the experience and proficiency of the staff. The supporting

commander provides any additional guidance. The MEU S-3 provides the planning timeline and

MCWP 5-10

110

assigns definite times for completing each step. The locations for planning and any required

augmentation for their planning cells are determined. Augmentees acknowledge their requirements

and identify themselves to the mission commander. Participants adjourn to their respective mission

planning cells once problem framing is complete and the mission is determined.

Based on the type of mission assigned, the mission commander may also direct commencement of

specific preparations by the forces. For example, if the ACE has been assigned to conduct TRAP,

the ACE can simultaneously prepare the standard package of aircraft while the predesignated

ground force draws the standard list of ordnance and prepares mission-associated equipment.

Course of Action Development

For simplicity purposes, this step of the R2P2 assumes that the mission commander is developing

COAs. The mission commander begins COA development by convening the mission planning cell

and conducting roll call. A review significant material from the first step of the process may be

conducted if some cell members were not present for problem framing. This review may include

an intelligence brief by the S-2 and a presentation by the S-3 on the mission and the CAT’s problem

framing.

The mission commander summarizes the MEU and ARG commanders’ guidance and then presents

his/her own. If information is required to support COA development, the commander directs

specific members of the mission planning cell to gather the required information. The mission

planning cell then begins to develop COAs.

Depending on the guidance received, the mission planning cell may initially concentrate on a

specific COA. Effective COA development relies on intuitive decision-making and operational

SOPs to meet the reduced timeline of the R2P2. The planning cell develops each COA considering

such factors as—

 R&S linkup procedures, if applicable.

 Movement from the ship to the objective.

 Movement from objective back to the ship.

 Fire support.

 Command and control.

 Operations in the Information Environment.

 Task organization.

 Special equipment.

 General timeline.

The mission planning cell prepares graphics and narratives for each COA. The COAs are typically

broken into phases and evaluated to ensure they are suitable, feasible, acceptable, distinguishable,

and complete. If surface reconnaissance is required, then the R&S mission commander convenes

a planning cell and simultaneously conducts R&S COA development.

To ensure the parallel planning efforts of the primary and R&S mission planning cells are

coordinated, liaisons from each cell remain in constant contact. For example, an R&S coordinator

Marine Corps Planning Process

111

moves from planning cell to planning cell while keeping in close contact with the MEU S-3. Since

R&S elements are normally inserted prior to other forces, the R&S cell must develop their COAs

in a shorter period of time, but the R&S effort must support the information needs of the primary

mission commander.

The COA development brief can be presented to the CAT, the entire battlestaff, or only to the

MEU and ARG commanders, the MSE commanders, the primary mission commander, and a few

key staff officers. The R&S planning cell normally briefs first, while the primary mission planning

cell is still developing COAs. At the conclusion of the R&S COA brief, the R&S portion of the

operation can immediately move on to COA wargaming.

At this point, the primary mission commander has completed COA development and the planning

cell is preparing their own brief. The MEU and ARG commanders may approve the R&S COA

before receiving the COA brief for the primary mission. Alternatively, the MEU and ARG

commanders could delay COA wargaming and COA comparison and decision for the R&S

mission until deciding on a COA for the primary mission, but this delay would drastically reduce

time needed to prepare and launch R&S forces.

The COA development brief for the primary mission is given to the CAT and the battlestaff. If the

battlestaff concept is not employed, standby and follow-on mission planning cells and designated

additional staff officers and attachment leaders may also attend the COA brief. The brief follows

the unit planning SOP, but typically opens with the MEU S-3’s review of any ongoing/projected

missions and provision of updates/clarifications obtained from HHQ. The MEU S-2 and the ARG

N-2 provide an updated intelligence picture, focusing on changes since their last brief and

including any answers received to PIRs, FFIRs, or RFIs.

The mission commander summarizes the MEU and ARG mission, the envisioned end state,

measures of effectiveness, and the COAs. The mission commander presents the sketch; describes

expected events by phase; and provides the task organization, timeline, concept of fire support,

other significant details, and a list of key advantages/disadvantages for each COA.

Course of Action War Game

Once all the COAs have been briefed, staff officers, including appropriate attachment leaders and

SMEs, develop their staff estimates according to unit SOPs. To assist in reaching quick

conclusions and to avoid any oversights, each staff officer uses a prepared matrix that lists each

consideration relevant to their area of concern. For example, the S-4 could address supply

quantities and transportation means. Each staff member prepares an independent estimate that is

based solely on his/her area of expertise and includes each friendly COA’s strengths and

weaknesses, associated risks, and asset shortfalls as they apply to a warfighting function, staff

section, or attachment. These estimates assist commanders in reaching their decisions. The order

of briefing the estimates is established in the SOP. This brief should—

 Identify which COAs are unsupportable, if all are equally supportable, or if one is superior to

the others.

MCWP 5-10

112

 Identify any salient facts requiring the attention of the MEU and ARG commanders.

 Address impact of a COA on SOPs.

 Address impact of COAs on future operations.

For example, if “x” amount of helicopter and flight deck time is used today, then “y” amount will

be available tomorrow.

An intelligence officer is also usually tasked to produce an estimate from the enemy commander’s

perspective. The enemy commander’s viewpoint, as expressed by the S-2/N-2, and staff discussion

of hypothetical situations serve as additional wargaming within the time constraints of the planning

process. At a minimum, this estimate identifies the most dangerous and most likely COAs. The

recorder enters the information on a clearly visible staff estimate worksheet. The MSE

commanders who are not assigned as the mission commander also prepare and provide concise

estimates of supportability. An execution matrix or synchronization matrix is started or refined at

this point in the planning process. The mission commander makes the final input to avoid

influencing staff estimates. Rapid planning wargaming differs from the MCPP in that it may be

conducted internally within each staff section rather than being conducted as one large war game

where all MSEs and staff sections are represented. If time permits, the latter method is preferred.

Course of Action Comparison and Decision

Based on personal experiences and information acquired from COA wargaming, the MEU and

ARG commanders compare the COAs and rapidly reach a decision. Although the supported

commander is the lead decision maker, typically concurrence is sought from the supporting

commander, particularly when relying on assets from the supporting command. The commanders

may accept a single COA, modify a COA, or decide to execute something entirely different. Unless

the situation is changing rapidly, both time constraints and continuous involvement of the MEU

and ARG staff should preclude significant COA alterations. In announcing their decision, the

commanders provide their refined commander’s intent and any additional guidance needed to

finalize the plan.

Orders Development

During orders development, all echelons involved in the operation complete required detailed

planning for the approved COA, which is converted into the CONOPS. This vertical and horizontal

flow of information among the chain of command and all elements of the MEU and ARG is vital

to concurrent planning and preparation. If the mission forces or supporting echelons encounter any

difficulties or if the situation changes, the mission planning cell is alerted immediately and the

MEU and ARG commanders are notified if any significant alterations to the COA arise. If changes

in the situation threaten the suitability of the COA and if time permits, the commanders may direct

the staff and the mission planning cell to return to an earlier step in the planning process.

The mission commander immediately passes the results of COA comparison and decision to the

forces to assist their planning and preparations. The mission commander and the mission planning

cell continue to update and forward planning details as changes occur. Plans for supporting or

Marine Corps Planning Process

113

contingency missions may also be developed. Such missions may be mass casualty, medical

evacuation, platoon-size reinforcement, initial terminal guidance, linkup, evasion, or recovery.

Supporting echelons, such as ships or other MSEs, receive updated information from their liaison

officers inside the mission planning cell. The mission planning cell produces a confirmation brief,

which serves as the draft OPORD.

The MEU S-3 creates and delivers the graphic and written CONOPS in addition to other

documents required by HHQ. To save time and ensure coordinated execution, the commander may

not approve the completed final order until after the confirmation brief.

Transition

The commander approves the mission for execution immediately following the confirmation brief;

therefore, the confirmation brief is the primary tool used to transition from planning to execution.

It is also the optimum means of final coordination within the time available and it can serve as a

form of rehearsal. The brief’s purpose is to ensure those involved in executing the plan completely

understand it and achieve situational awareness.

The brief also ensures agreement among force elements, since all critical participants are present.

Because the confirmation brief is primarily for those who have a role in executing the mission, all

available members of the mission planning cell and the mission force should attend. Supporting

elements, such as ship personnel, not represented in the mission planning cell should also attend.

All standby and follow-on mission planning cells that might be affected by the primary mission

should also observe the brief. The CAT and battlestaff members should attend to provide expertise

and answer questions.

Using the format in the unit planning SOP, the confirmation brief is conducted by the mission

commander. Each participant uses the SOP’s format and media in the brief to avoid overlaps or

omissions. The presentation media are collected by the scribe and assembled into a smart pack that

may serve as the written order. An initial version of the smart pack may be assembled during orders

development, but it should not be issued until sanctioned by the commander at the confirmation

brief. The original confirmation brief’s contents, together with any resulting changes or decisions,

must be provided to the R&S force, particularly if no representative attended, to ensure that the

final, approved mission is understood.

The brief’s major focus is on actions occurring in the objective area. The commander of the

element executing these actions, such as the raid force commander, provides a detailed explanation

of the intended actions and the specific tasks assigned to subordinate elements. During the brief,

the commanders and their staffs identify any potential problems. Conflicts that arise from the brief

are resolved or planned for prior to the completion of the brief. Additional planning must occur if

anything is briefed that is not yet planned for or coordinated.

The primary mission confirmation brief is usually limited to an hour. The MEU and ARG

commanders may schedule confirmation briefs for standby or follow-on missions following

completion of the primary mission brief. Upon completion of the primary mission brief, various

elements of the force may conduct supporting briefs to the same audience. The commander then

MCWP 5-10

114

designates time for subordinate element leaders to accomplish any remaining preparations and

rehearsals and a final inspection of troops and equipment is conducted to ensure mission readiness.

During the period before the launch of forces, the MEU and ARG command echelons supervise

the final preparations and coordination of subordinate elements and prepare for their own role in

the command and control of the operation. The SOPs establish command and control procedures

for various types of operations except that preparation time is limited. Assumptions and

preconditions are validated and branch and sequel planning should occur.

Sample Planning Matrix

Table H-1 is a sample planning matrix. Units normally develop their own timelines and SOPs.

Table H-1. Sample Planning Matrix.

Timelines

Who

Command and

Staff Actions

Products

Concurrent and

Parallel Actions

Problem

Framing

0:00-0:30

CAT

Receipt of mission

Commander’s orientation

Break out IPB and intelligence folders

Conduct problem framing

Mission statement

Commander’s intent

Commander’s planning guidance

Updated IPB products

Specified tasks

Implied tasks

Essential tasks

Limitations (constraints [must do]

and restraints [cannot do])

Assumptions

Resource/SME shortfalls

COG analysis

Approved CCIRs

Battlestaff forms

Cross-deck requirements

Command and staff

supervision

0:30-0:50

Battlestaff

Initial staff orientation

Determine information

requirements

Commander’s planning guidance

WARNORDs

Planning schedule

RFIs

Initial staff estimates

Acknowledge receipt

Issue planning schedule

R&S planning

Command and staff

supervision

Marine Corps Planning Process

115

Table H-1. Sample Planning Matrix (Continued).

COA

Development

0:50-1:10

Battlestaff

Convene planning cells

(if not already done)

Update IPB/intelligence

Develop COA(s)

COAs written and graphics

developed

(time and distance identified)

Each potential response force

commander prepares actions in

objective area plan

Air support requirement to carrier

battle group

Staff/subordinate command

estimates

Commander’s wargaming

guidance and evaluation criteria

R&S planning/brief

Command and staff

supervision

COA War Game/COA Comparison and Decision

1:10-1:30

Battlestaff

Conduct COA war game

Refine COAs/IPB

COAs briefed

Compare/evaluate COAs

Commander makes decision

War game results

WARNORDs

CONOPS

Execution matrix

Refined staff estimates

Identify branches/sequels

Updated CCIRs

Response force/support

element planning

Command and staff

supervision

Orders

Development

1:30-3:00

Battlestaff

Refine IPB

Prepare OPORD

Order reconciliation

Order crosswalk

OPORD approval

Timeline

Graphic and overlay

Fire support plan

Landing plan

Communications plan

Execution checklist

WARNORDs

Concept of operations message

to HHQ

Charts/maps

Confirmation briefing slides

Develop timeline/plan

R&S launch

Command and staff

supervision

Cross-decker return

Final planning conference

Transition

3:00-4:00

Battlestaff

Confirmation brief/issue the order

Total understanding by all hands

of the plan

Response from force

commander

Briefs/response from

force/support elements

4:00-6:00

Amphibious

Task Force

Drills

All hands ready to execute

mission

Alternate/sequel plan(s)

developed

MCWP 5-10

116

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

APPENDIX I

INTERAGENCY/INTERORGANIZATIONAL COORDINATION

Joint and multinational operations are integrated at the strategic level and coordinated at the

operational and tactical level with the activities of participating US Government departments and

agencies, relevant international organizations, NGOs, host nation agencies, and elements of the

private sector to achieve common objectives. Refer to JP 3-08, Interorganizational Cooperation,

for additional information.

Annex V (Interagency/Interorganizational Coordination) of the OPORD or OPLAN reflects the

commander’s priorities and approach to interorganizational cooperation. Information in the annex

provides a basis for staff and liaison interaction with these numerous organizations and agencies.

Continued coordination strengthens the whole of government efforts and improves the probability

of mission success. In developing Annex V, consideration should be given to—

 Key Interagency Strategies. Marine Corps planners must become familiar with interagency

strategies, assessments, and plans at all levels (see table I-1). Requests for relevant interagency

strategies, such as counternarcotics or counterterrorism, must be made through the appropriate

interagency coordination center within each geographic combatant command or Marine Corps

component command. A basic understanding of these strategies, assessments, or plans is

critical to enable interagency activities.

 Assessment and Planning Frameworks. Interagency partners in many cases have developed

assessment tools and have conducted or are conducting assessments in the area of operations.

These assessments, coupled with their authorities, make interagency coordination a valuable

process. This is especially true for operations in the information environment, where the

application of military information power complements diplomatic efforts, federal law

enforcement agencies as well as cyberspace and space operations. All security cooperation

events will require assessment, monitoring, and evaluation to determine the outcomes of

partner capability development. (For more information, see JP 3-20, Security Cooperation.)

Assessment tools, such as the Interagency Conflict Assessment Framework, should be the

starting point for an interagency team to assess conflict systematically and collaboratively

prepare for interagency planning. Planners may employ other tools, such as Measuring Peace

in Conflict Environments (MPICE): A Metrics Framework and the Interagency Management

System for Reconstruction and Stabilization, to facilitate interagency activities. The United

States Institute of Peace publication Guiding Principles for Stabilization and Reconstruction

is an example of a reference that would augment the applicable joint doctrine, such as JP 3-07,

Stability. A liaison or staff officer assigned to interorganizational cooperation needs to study

the relevant joint and agency publications. Interagency planning structures will not supersede

Marine Corps planning structures.

MCWP 5-10

118

Table I-1. Interagency Documents.

Document

Primary Office or Responsibility

Summary of Document

Guidance for Employment of the Force

Department of Defense

Annual classified document that

prioritizes theater strategic end

states that include interagency

cooperation and integration.

Country Development Cooperation

Strategy

United States Agency for

International

Development

(USAID)

5-year look at the needs of a

country.

Bureau Strategic Plan

Department of State bureaus,

both regional and functional

Annual interagency objectives

and performance result indicators.

Integrated Country Strategy (ICS)

Chief of mission; to include all

other US Government agencies

that reside on the country team

Annual interagency objectives by

priority.

Operational Plan

USAID mission in country

Annual plan that feeds into

mission support plan.

APPENDIX

BASIC OPERATION PLAN,

OPERATION ORDER, AND

TTACHMENTS

This appendix provides instructions and formats that govern the development of a basic operation

plan and order, referred to as OPLAN and OPORD, respectively. The formats are based on the

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Manual (CJCSM) 3130.03A, Planning and Execution

Formats and Guidance, and should be used by all staffs, subordinate commands, and support

agencies.

This appendix applies to commanders of Marine Corps forces at all levels. It contains two sections.

Section I provides general administrative guidance for writing a basic operation plan or order. An

operation plan/order foldout is included at the end of this publication for quick reference. Section

II includes sample formats of a plan summary, operation plan or order, and other attachments.

Sample formats are descriptive in nature and identify the information that needs to be placed in

the appropriate paragraph. The formats provided in section II are followed except when, in the

judgment of the commander, modifications are required. Only those annexes, appendices, and tabs

applicable to the level of command are required within the operation order.

SECTION I. GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDANCE

The arrangement of information in a basic operation plan or order will conform to the formats

shown in this appendix. Paragraph and subparagraph headings indicated in the format will always

appear in each plan. In OPORDs, if information or instructions are not required in a particular

paragraph, then that paragraph is noted as “not applicable” to show that consideration has been

given to that part of the order. Further subdivisions, if required, should conform to the basic system

of paragraph titles and numbering discussed below. The sequencing for naming supplemental

documents to the basic plan/order is as follows: annex, appendix, tab, exhibit.

The last page of the basic operation plan or order and each attachment will contain a list of any

included documents. The basic operation order or plan should refer to each annex. Information

provided in the basic operation order or plan is not normally repeated in the attachments.

Paragraphing, Titling, and Numbering

Paragraph titles are a combination of upper and lower case letters that are underlined, as in

Situation. All subparagraphs and subtitles are upper and lower case and underlined, as in Concept

of Operations, except forces, commands, or agencies. Forces, commands, and agencies are

capitalized and underlined only in titles, as in SPECIAL PURPOSE MAGTF.

When a paragraph is subdivided, it must have at least two subdivisions. When paragraphs are

subdivided, they will be numbered and lettered as follows:

MCWP 5-10

120

(1)

(a)

(1)

(a)

Subsequent lines of text for each paragraph may be align flush with the left margin or equally

indented (as in the following examples) as long as consistency is maintained.

Example 1: Flush with left margin

a. (U) Situation. Follow-on text. Text, text, text, text, text, text, text, text, text, text, text, text, text,

text, text, text, text, text, text, text, text, text, text.

Example 2: Equally Indented.

a. (U) Situation. Follow-on text. Text, text, text, text, text, text, text, text, text, text, text, text,

text, text, text, text, text, text, text, text, text, text, text.

Classification Markings

Mark front and back covers with the overall classification of the operation plan/order. Mark the

first page of plan elements—plan summary, basic plan, and each annex, appendix, tab, and

exhibit—with the overall classification of the element. Unclassified plan elements are marked as

such. Mark each interior page of the classified plan element with the highest classification and

sensitive classified information code word of the material contained on the page. If the page does

not contain classified material, mark it as unclassified. Center classification markings between the

left and right margins at both the top and bottom of the page. The classification marking is written

in uppercase letters, as in UNCLASSIFIED.

All paragraphs will have a security classification level. Use parenthetical symbols (TS), (S), (C),

and (U) to indicate the security classification level of titles, paragraphs, and subparagraphs. For

additional guidance related to classification marking for documents, see Department of Defense

Manual 5200.01 Volume 1, DoD Information Security Program: Overview, Classification, and

Declassification.

Page Numbering

Page numbers are located at the bottom of the page and centered. Page C-1-A-3, for example,

denotes page 3 of Tab A to Appendix 1 to Annex C. There is a single space between the page

number and the classification marking.

Marine Corps Planning Process

121

Formatting Instructions

The following list provides a line-by-line format for the OPLAN and OPORD:

Line 1—Classification.

Line 2—Changes from Oral Orders. These changes are used when oral orders regarding this

operation were previously issued and are enclosed in parentheses. Example: “(No change from

oral orders except paragraphs 3b and 3f.).” This phrase is omitted in plans and in orders when no

oral orders were issued.

Lines 3–7—Heading Data. The heading data is formatted as follows:

Copy no. ___ of ____ copies

OFFICIAL DESIGNATION OF COMMAND

PLACE OF ISSUE

Date-time group

Message reference number

 The first line of the heading is the copy number assigned by the issuing headquarters. A copy

number is given to each copy. It is not shown on attached annexes. A log will be maintained

of specific copies issued to addressees.

 The second line is the official designation of the command. It is always capitalized. Use a code

name if required for security.

 The third line is the place of issue. It may be a code name, postal designator, or geographic

location (including coordinates). The place of issue is always capitalized.

 The fourth line is the date or date-time group the plan or order is signed, issued, and becomes

effective unless specified otherwise in coordinating instructions.

 The fifth line is the message reference number. It is assigned by the originator and contains

letters, numbers, or a combination of the two. The message reference number has no

connection with the message center numbering system. Annexes issued separately are assigned

different message reference numbers. It allows their acknowledgement in the clear.

Line 8—Title. Orders are numbered consecutively for a calendar year. Two or more orders issued

on the same day are given consecutive numbers. A joint operation plan or order is so designated.

The code name, if any, is shown.

Line 9—Type of Document.

Lines 10–13—References. Documents, such as maps, charts, photo maps, or standing operating

procedures, necessary for understanding must be available to recipients. This entry is always

included. Use “References: None” when applicable. Map entries include series number, country,

sheet names or numbers, edition, and scale.

Line 14—Time Zone. If the time zone is the same for the place of issue and execution and will

be the same throughout execution, then this entry may be omitted. If the time zone is different in

MCWP 5-10

122

the area of execution, as frequently occurs in amphibious or airborne operations, then state when

the indicated time zone becomes effective.

Line 15—Task Organization. Task organization may be shown in the following ways:

 As an unnumbered entry before paragraph 1 (Situation). Used when entire command of issuing

headquarters is organized into task organizations for a particular operation and task

organizations are too complicated to be shown using other methods.

 If there is no change to previous task organization, show as “No change.”

 Under the proper subparagraph of paragraph 3. This method is the simplest and preferred in a

continuing ground combat situation. Show as “No change except paragraph 3b . . .”

 As an annex when lengthy, such as for a division or higher. It is used in amphibious operations,

because it permits early dissemination and assists concurrent planning, and where planning

precedes operation by a considerable period of time.

The organization of the issuing headquarters, including Service and administrative groupings that

will perform normal functions, is the first entry. Following that, each task grouping to receive a

tactical mission is shown in the sequence in which the missions are assigned in paragraph 3.

See fig. J-1 for an example of the aforementioned lines 1–15.

Figure J-1. Sample Operation Plan or Operation Order Format, Lines 1–15.

CLASSIFICATION

(No change from oral orders)

Copy no.__ of__ copies

I MEF

GREENTOWN, BLUELAND

DD Mmm YYYY

ABD-1

OPERATION ORDER 0002-10 (OPERATION SHARP SWORD) (U)

BASIC ORDER (U)

(U) REFERENCES:

(a) Maps and Charts: Series ONC, sheet G-2 (ORANGELAND, BLUELAND),edition 12,

1:1,000,000

(b) USINDOPACOM Planning Directive, DD Mmm YYYY

(U) TIME ZONE: Zulu

(U) TASK ORGANIZATION. Annex A

Marine Corps Planning Process

123

Lines 17–18—General. For plans, describe the general politico-military environment that would

establish the probable preconditions for execution of the plan. For orders, this can be the

commander’s estimate of the situation. In both cases, the lines include information obtained during

the ongoing design effort.

Line 19—Battlespace. Battlespace includes the higher commander’s area of operation and the

command’s areas of interest, influence, and operations described by physical area and forces of

concern.

Line 20—Enemy Forces. The enemy forces section includes information vital to the entire

command or information likely to affect mission accomplishment. It may refer to such attachments

as the intelligence annex, operation overlay (if enemy information is shown), or intelligence

summaries. It contains disposition, intent, objectives, vulnerabilities, centers of gravity, and

courses of action.

Line 21—Friendly Forces. Friendly forces include information on own forces having a bearing

on the operation (higher, adjacent, and supporting). Artillery is listed as the first supporting unit

and then others are listed alphabetically. It may reference an annex or the operation overlay.

Line 22—Attachments and Detachments. Nonorganic units attached and/or organic units

detached from the unit temporarily.

Lines 23–25—Paragraph 2. Paragraph 2 is the mission statement. There are no subparagraphs.

The mission is always stated here even if shown on an operation overlay or map.

Line 26—Paragraph 3. Paragraph 3 addresses execution.

Line 27—Commander’s Intent. Commander’s intent is the commander’s personal expression of

the purpose of the operation and the desired end state. It must be clearly and concisely written. The

purpose of providing intent is to allow subordinates to exercise judgment and initiative—to depart

from the plan when the task assigned is no longer appropriate to the situation—in a way that is

consistent with the higher commander’s aims.

Line 28—Concept of Operations. The concept of operations is a summary statement of how the

operation will be accomplished. It amplifies paragraph 2 by providing the method, end state, and

other considerations. It may be shown graphically or published as an appendix to annex C. Specific

unit designations are not used.

Lines 29–35—Tasks. This subparagraph identifies tasks to subordinate elements. The highest

priority task or tasks to subordinates will include the purpose, as in “in order to …” Additional

tasks may simply be listed, if the purpose is understood. Each unit (organic, attached, supporting,

etc.) or tactical grouping that is executing a tactical task is assigned a separate, numbered

subparagraph. All tactical tasks must be listed in the body of the basic order. List tasks for major

subordinate elements as follows:

 Offensive order—Ground combat units (infantry first followed by artillery and combat support

units numerically or alphabetically), aviation combat units or elements (aircraft units, combat

support, combat service support), and combat service support units or logistic elements.

 Defensive order—Units or elements closest to the enemy are listed first. Ground and aviation

combat units in the forward defense area are then listed in numerical order followed by other

units alphabetically.

MCWP 5-10

124

Each tactical task assignment may show the assets (attached or in support) available to the unit or

element for the operation first, then tasks are enumerated. For each subordinate element, tasks are

listed in priority of importance or in sequential order.

Line 36—Reserve. The reserve is tasked separately from the remainder of the units. It is usually

designated the main effort when committed. If there is no reserve designated, then so state.

Line 37—Commander’s Critical Information Requirements. Commander’s critical

information requirements identify information the commander has deemed critical to maintaining

situational awareness, planning future activities, and assisting in timely and informed decision-

making. The commander’s critical information requirements consist of priority intelligence

requirements and friendly force information requirements that will be numbered (e.g., PIR #1: Is

the 2d Centralian Armored Brigade crossing the Green River?). Each numbered priority

intelligence requirement and friendly force information requirement will include anticipated

decisions and associated branches and sequels, as developed during the Marine Corps Planning

Process. Operations divided into multiple phases may have separate commander’s critical

information requirements lists for each phase.

Line 38—Coordinating Instructions. This paragraph is the final subparagraph in paragraph 3. It

contains instructions common to two or more units, coordinating details and control measures

applicable to the command as a whole, and time or conditions when the plan is to be executed. It

refers to annexes or references for coordinating details when appropriate. Communications

instructions are shown in paragraph 5 only.

Line 39—Paragraph 4. Paragraph 4 contains logistic and personnel information and instructions

for the operation. At a minimum, this paragraph provides a summary of the concept of logistics,

then directs readers to the appropriate annexes and appendices.

Line 40—Page number.

Line 41—Classification.

See fig. J-2 for an example of the aforementioned lines 16–41.

Marine Corps Planning Process

125

Figure J-2. Sample Operation Plan or Operation Order Format, Lines 16–41.

Page two of the OPLAN or OPORD provides the following information and is exemplified in

fig. J-3:

Line 1—Classification.

Lines 2–6—Paragraph 5. Paragraph 5 contains instructions that establish and maintain command

and signal procedures.

1. (U) Situation

a. (U) General. With the failure of deterrence, Blueland forces crossed the Orangeland border and

have been successful in their initial battles.

b. (U) Battlespace. See appendix 18 to annex C.

c. (U) Enemy Forces. See annex B and current INTSUMs [intelligence summaries].

d. (U) Friendly Forces

e. (U) Attachments and Detachments

2. (U) Mission. On order, I MEF, as the main effort, conducts offensive operations to defeat adversary

forces in zone in order to restore the Blueland border. Be prepared to continue offensive operation into

Orangeland to destroy remaining Orangeland offensive military capabilities.

3. (U) Execution

a. (U) Commander’s Intent

b. (U) Concept of Operations. This operation will be conducted in three phases.

c. (U) Tasks

(1) (U) 1st

MARINE DIVISION (Rein)

(2) (U) 3d MARINE AIRCRAFT WING

(3) (U) 1st

MARINE LOGISTICS GROUP (-) (Rein)

(4) (U) SPECIAL PURPOSE MAGTF-B

(5) (U) REAR AREA COMMANDER

(6) (U) MIG

d. (U) MEF Reserve

e. (U) Commander’s Critical Information Requirements

f. (U) Coordinating Instructions

4. (U) Administration and Logistics

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

126

 Command Relationships. Used in a large operation or when relationships are unusual,

otherwise omitted. If command relationships are clarified in the task organization, there is no

requirement to restate them in this paragraph.

 Command Posts and Headquarters. May reference operations overlay for locations.

 Succession to Command. Designates the succession to command for the operation.

 Signal. Usually references annex K and other communication publications, such as standing

operating procedures or communications-electronics operating instructions. Includes

instructions or restrictions about communications-electronics, such as radio restrictions or

pyrotechnic signals.

Use additional subparagraphs to show location and time of opening communications centers,

recognition and identification instructions, code words and names, and liaisons.

Line 7—Acknowledgement Instructions. Acknowledgement instructions are included in every

order and in separately issued portions. It ensures that recipients receive and understand the order.

Lines 8–10—Signature and Authentication. The basic operation plan or order and each annex

within are signed or authenticated by the commander. Full signature blocks are used. Appropriate

officers may be given authority to sign portions of the order. The commander is the only person

authorized to sign or approve any portion of the order unless by direction authority has been

granted to another individual.

 Appendices, tabs, exhibits, and maps do not require signature or authentication except when

distributed separately from the basic operation order or plan.

 Original is signed by commander, with name, rank and service, and title:

Name,

Rank and Service

Title

Lines 11–34—Annexes. Annexes form a portion of the completed plan or order. They pertain to

a particular concept, subject, or coordination aspect that is too voluminous, of insufficient general

interest, or in an irregular form (e.g., overlays, graphs, or tables) for the body of the plan or order.

Annexes amplify and clarify information and details within the basic operation plan or order.

Sequence and lettering must not be changed, but annexes may be omitted when not required.

Annexes are amplified where necessary by appendices to annexes, tabs to appendices, and exhibits

to tabs.

Annex formats and designations shown in this appendix are mandatory unless otherwise indicated.

The annex title is upper and lower case. Within the body of the basic operation plan or order, the

annex title is also enclosed in parentheses. When any of these annexes are not required, the annex

is noted as “not used” or “not applicable” in the table of contents. Elements that will be developed

later may be noted as “to be issued.”

Annex format is preferred for other attachments, such as appendices or tabs, but it may be altered

when information or instructions must be included for which no provision is made in the standard

format.

Additional annexes may be added when necessary to permit distribution separate from the basic

operation order or plan or when information must be included where no provision is made in

standard annexes.

Marine Corps Planning Process

127

Usually annexes A, B, C, D, J, and K will be provided as part of the basic operation order or plan.

Develop additional annexes and their associated appendices in an abbreviated format for those

areas significantly affecting mission accomplishment.

Lines 35–39—Authentication. Authenticated by deputy, executive officer, chief of staff, or G-

3/S-3 when the commander’s or executive officer’s signature is on the original only. This

authentication appears on all other copies. The original is signed by chief of staff/executive officer:

OFFICIAL:

Name

Rank and Service

Title

Line 40—Page number.

Line 41—Classification.

MCWP 5-10

128

Figure J-3. Sample Operation Plan or Operation Order Format, Page 2.

CLASSIFICATION

5. (U) Command and Signal

a. (U) Command Relationships. See Annex J (Command Relationships).

b. (U) Command Posts and Headquarters.

c. (U) Succession to Command

d. (U) Signal. See Annex K (Combat Information Systems)

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT

GERALD C. THOMAS

Lieutenant General, USMC

Commanding

ANNEXES:

A—Task Organization

B—Intelligence

C—Operations

D—Logistics/Combat Service Support

E—Personnel

G—Civil-Military Operations

H—Meteorological and Oceanographic Operations

I—Information

J—Command Relationships

K—Combat Information Systems

L—Environmental Considerations

M—Geospatial Information and Services

N—Space Operations

P—Host-Nation Support

Q—Medical Services

R—Reports

S—Special Technical Operations

T—Network Engagement

U—Information Management

V—Interagency-Interorganizational Coordination

W—Aviation Operations

X—Execution Checklist

Z—Distribution

OFFICIAL

M.B. TWINING

Colonel, USMC

AC/S G-3

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

129

SECTION II. SAMPLE FORMATS

Section II provides examples of a plan summary, basic operation plan or order, and select annexes,

appendices, and tabs. Sample formats are descriptive in nature and identify the information

necessary for the appropriate paragraph. For annexes and appendices, commanders may modify

the format, to include using graphs and slides, to meet the needs of the unit and their operation.

The following table of contents lists standing formats. Bold text indicates the format is provided

in this section. Examples for many of the annexes and appendices may be found in CJSCM

3130.03A, Planning and Execution Formats and Guidance.

Page

Plan Summary 134

Basic Order or Plan 137

Annex A. Task Organization 143

Appendix 1. Time-Phased Force and Deployment List

Appendix 2. Shortfall Identification

Appendix 3. Flexible Response and Flexible Deterrent Options

Annex B. Intelligence 146

Appendix 1. Priority Intelligence Requirements

Appendix 2. Signals Intelligence

Tab A. Communications Intelligence Collection Requirements

Tab B. Operational Electronic Intelligence Collection Requirements

Appendix 3. Counterintelligence

Tab A. Counterintelligence Target List

Tab B. Multidiscipline Counterintelligence Threat Report

Tab C. Designation of Theater Counterintelligence Executive Agency

Appendix 4. Targeting Intelligence

Tab A. Target List (Conventional)

Appendix 5. Human Resource Intelligence

Tab A. HUMINT Operations Cell Operations

Tab B. EPW/Civilian Detainees

Appendix 6. Intelligence Support to Operations in the Information Environment

Appendix 7. Imagery Intelligence

Appendix 8. Measurement and Signature Intelligence

Appendix 9. Captured Adversary Equipment

Tab A. Specific Prioritized Intelligence Collection Requirements

Tab B. Equipment Releasable for Operational Purposes

Appendix 10. National Intelligence Support Team

Appendix 11. Intelligence Estimate

Appendix 12. Intelligence Products

Appendix 13. Intelligence Collection Plan

Appendix 14. Reconnaissance and Surveillance Plan

Appendix 15. Geographic Intelligence

Appendix 16. Intelligence Operations

Appendix 17. Support to Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape

Annex C. Operations 151

Appendix 1. Nuclear Operations

Appendix 2. Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Defense Operations

MCWP 5-10

130

Page

Appendix 3. Special Operations

Appendix 4. Evasion and Recovery Operations

Appendix 5. Risk

Appendix 6. Rules of Engagement

Appendix 7. Reconnaissance

Appendix 8. Air Base Operability

Appendix 9. Noncombatant Evacuation Operations

Appendix 10. Explosive Ordnance Disposal

Appendix 11. Amphibious Operations

Tab A. Amphibious Advance Force Operations

Tab B. Embarkation Plan

Tab C. Landing Plan

Tab D. Rehearsal Plan

Tab E. CSS Control Agencies Plan

Tab F. Assault Follow-On Echelon Plan

Tab G. Maritime Prepositioing Force Plan

Appendix 12. Force Protection

Tab A. Combating Terrorism

Tab B. Physical Security

Tab C. Base Defense

Tab D. Counter-Improvised Device Plan

Appendix 13. Rear Area Operations

Appendix 14. Cyberspace Operations

Appendix 15. Liaison Plan

Appendix 16. Operations Overlay 154

Appendix 17. Fire Support

Tab A. Aviation Support

Tab B. Artillery Support Plan

Tab C. Naval Surface Fire Support

Tab D. Current Fire Support Operations

Tab E. Targeting

Tab F. Fire Support Coordination Plan

Tab G. Fire Support System Plan

Tab H. Reports

Tab I. Coalition Fire Support Plan

Tab J. Counterfire Plan

Tab K. Liaison Plan

Appendix 18. Countermechanized Plan

Appendix 19. Obstacle and Barrier Plan

Appendix 20. Breaching Plan

Appendix 21. Decision Support Matrix and Template

Appendix 22. Operation Assessment Plan

Appendix 23. Enemy Prisoners of War and Civilian Internees Plan

Appendix 24. Authorities Matrix

Annex D. Logistics/Combat Service Support 156

Appendix 1. Petroleum, Oils, and Lubricants Supply

Appendix 2. Mortuary Affairs

Appendix 3. Sustainability Analysis

Appendix 4. Mobility and Transportation

Tab A. En Route Support Requirements

Marine Corps Planning Process

131

Page

Tab B. Reception and Onward Movement

Appendix 5. Civil Engineering Support Plan

Appendix 6. Nonnuclear Ammunition

Tab A. Munitions Matrix

Appendix 7. Supply

Appendix 8. Services

Appendix 9. Health Services

Appendix 10. Aviation Logistic Support (normally in the aviation combat element plan or order)

Appendix 11. External Support

Appendix 12. Maintenance

Appendix 13. General Engineering

Annex E. Personnel

Appendix 1. Personnel Replacement Plan

Appendix 2. Processing of Formerly Captured, Missing, or Detained US Personnel

Appendix 3. Finance and Disbursing

Appendix 4. Legal

Appendix 5. Military Postal Service

Tab A. Aerial Mail Terminals

Tab B. Military Post Offices

Appendix 6. Chaplain Activities

Tab A. Inter-Service Chaplain Support

Tab B. Host-Nation Religious Support

Tab C. Commander-Staff Chaplain Relationships

Annex G. Civil-Military Operations

Appendix 1. Population and Resource Control (Dislocated Civilians Operations)

Appendix 2. Foreign Humanitarian Assistance

Appendix 3. Nations Assistance Operations

Annex H. Meteorological and Oceanographic Operations

Annex I. Information 163

Appendix 1. Assure Enterprise Command and Control and Critical Systems

Appendix 2. Provide Information Environment Battlespace Awareness

Appendix 3. Attack and Exploit Networks, Systems, and Information

Appendix 4. Inform Domestic and International Audiences

Tab A. Communication Strategy and Operations

Exhibit 1.

Personnel, Equipment, and Support Requirements for Joint Information Bureaus and Sub-

Joint Information

Bureaus

Exhibit 2. General Ground Rules for the Media

Exhibit 3. Department of Defense National Media Pool

Appendix 5. Influence Foreign Target Audiences

Tab A. Military Information Support Operations

Appendix 6. Deceive Foreign Target Audiences

Tab A. Military Deception 168

Exhibit 2. MILDEC Intelligence 173

Attachment A. MILDEC Priority Intelligence Requirements 176

Appendix 7. Control Operations in the Information Environment Capabilities, Resources, and Activities

Appendix 8. Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations

Tab A. Electronic Warfare

Tab B. Electromagnetic Spectrum Management

MCWP 5-10

132

Page

Appendix 9. Cyberspace Operations

Tab A. Defensive Cyberspace Operations

Tab B. Offensive Cyberspace Operations

Tab C. Department of Defense Information Network Operations

Appendix 10. Civil-Military Operations

Appendix 11. Operations Security

Tab A. Signature Management

Annex J. Command Relationships 177

Appendix 1. Command Relationships Diagram 180

Annex K. Combat Information Systems

Appendix 1. Information Systems Security

Appendix 2. Defensive Actions in the Information Environment

Appendix 3. Communications Planning

Appendix 4. Satellite Communications Planning

Tab A. UHF SATCOM Network List

Tab B. SHF SATCOM Network List

Tab C. EHF SATCOM Network List

Appendix 5. Department of Defense Information Network Operations

Appendix 6. Electromagnetic Spectrum Management

Annex L. Environmental Considerations

Annex M. Geospatial Information and Services

Appendix 1. Geospatial Information and Services List

Annex N. Space Operations

Annex P. Host-Nation Support

Appendix 1. List of Host-Nation Support Agreements

Annex Q. Medical Services

Appendix 1. Joint Medical Regulating System

Appendix 2. Joint Blood Program

Appendix 3. Hospitalization

Appendix 4. Patient Evacuation

Appendix 4. Returns to Duty

Appendix 5. Medical Logistics (Class 8A) System

Appendix 6. Preventive Medicine

Appendix 7. Host Nation Medical Support

Appendix 9. Patient Evacuation

Appendix 8. Medical Communications and Information Systems

Appendix 10. Medical Sustainability Assessment

Appendix 11. Medical Intelligence Support to Military Operations

Appendix 12. Veterinary Medicine

Appendix 13. Medical Planning Responsibilities and Task Identifications

Appendix 14. Detainee Care

Annex R: Reports

Annex S. Special Technical Operations

Marine Corps Planning Process

133

Page

Annex T. Network Engagement 181

Annex U. Information Management

Annex V. Interagency/Interorganizational Coordination 184

Annex W. Aviation Operations

Appendix 1. Air Defense/Antiair Warfare

Appendix 2. Offensive Air Support

Appendix 3. Assault Support

Appendix 4. Reconnaissance and Surveillance Plan

Appendix 5. Supplementary Air Operations

Appendix 6. Aircraft Armament

Appendix 7. Air Control

Appendix 8. Air Communications

Appendix 9. Air Movement Plan/Flight Ferry

Appendix 10. Aircraft Schedules

Appendix 11. Air Tasking

Annex X. Execution Checklist 187

Annex Z. Distribution

MCWP 5-10

134

SAMPLE FORMAT OF A PLAN SUMMARY

A plan summary allows commanders, staffs, and other individuals and agencies to quickly review

the envisioned activities of a command. They are particularly useful in creating situational

awareness in newly assigned personnel and in higher, supporting, and adjacent commands. A plan

summary is normally only prepared at higher levels of command, such as the Marine Corps

component commands and Marine expeditionary force, in support of a unified command plan.

CLASSIFICATION

Copy no. ___of

___

copies

OFFICIAL DESIGNATION OF COMMAND

PLACE OF ISSUE

Date-time group

Message reference number

OPLAN (Number) (Operation CODE WORD) (U)

PLAN SUMMARY (U)

1. (U) Purpose

a.(U) Describe the purpose to be achieved by executing the plan and the desired state. If this

is a supporting plan, indicate what plan it supports.

b.(U) Include a statement similar to the following: “This summary provides military decision

makers with the major aspects of this plan. It is based on planning factors and estimates

available at the time of preparation and is subject to modification in the context of a specific

contingency. The information contained herein must be updated before use in adopting courses

of action in a particular situation.”

2. (U) Conditions for Implementation/Execution

a.(U) Politico-Military Situation. Summarize the politico-military situation in which

execution of the plan should be considered.

b.(U) Legal Considerations. Summarize any legal considerations that may affect plan

implementation (status of forces, rules of engagement, international agreements, law of

armed conflict).

3. (U) Operations to be Conducted

a. (U) Forces Assigned. Summarize the major forces (assigned, attached, or supporting) and

augmentation required from other sources.

b. (U) Deployment. Summarize the movements of forces necessary to place combat forces in

the operational area. When applicable, include operational security measures to be carried out

before full execution of the plan.

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

135

CLASSIFICATION

c. (U) Employment. State the general nature of combat operations to be conducted, including

amphibious operations, operations in the information environment, or electronic warfare, when

applicable. These operations may be discussed in the phases of the operations. A mission

statement, commander’s intent, and concept of operations may be written for each phase. This

discussion may contain a concise statement of the operation’s end state and end state for each

phase. It may include how unit dispositions at the end of each phase facilitate transition to the

next phase. A discussion of the commander’s estimate of the enemy’s intent may also be

included.

d. (U) Supporting Plans. List any requirements for supporting plans to be prepared by

subordinate and supporting commands or agencies.

e. (U) Collateral Plans. List operation plans that could be implemented before, during, or after

the subject plan.

4. (U) Key Assumptions. List assumptions deemed essential to the success of the plan, including

the degree of mobilization and mobility (sealift and airlift) assumed.

5. (U) Operational Constraints. List major factors that may impede accomplishment of the

mission.

6. (U) Time to Commence Effective Operations. If appropriate, include a table showing the

required time-phased buildup of combat forces in the objective area. Indicate which forces must

be available in the operational area before effective operations can begin. Show the elapsed time,

following an order to implement the plan, when each significant level of combat force required by

the plan could begin effective operations in the objective area. Note that the lowest level of force

reported will be the smallest force increment that could initiate effective operations. List

successively higher force levels up to the maximum level called for in the basic plan. List any

assumptions applied in preparing the table that are not specified in the plan. In determining the

time to commence effective operations, consider forces to be deployed or employed to be at normal

conditions of readiness; that is, no preparations except those required for force protection. Also

consider the following additional factors, as appropriate.

a. (U) Time required to carry out information operations as specified in the relevant plans.

b. (U) Time for preparation and transmission of necessary orders.

c. (U) Reaction time, including all necessary preparations for movement and, if necessary,

staging.

d. (U) Availability and capability of strategic transportation resources and facilities.

e. (U) Time en route to the operational area, using available lift and considering pos

sible

restrictions on the use of deployment routes.

f. (U) Possible enemy action against forces in transit.

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

136

CLASSIFICATION

g. (U) Reception and throughput capabilities of overseas terminals, where appropriate.

h. (U) Time to marry up forces and equipment deployed by separate movement modes,

including marry up with prepositioned equipment, when appropriate.

i. (U) Availability and capability of transport systems within the area of operations, where

required.

j. (U) Time required in the operational area for final preparation of forces, including

movement to the objective area before employment.

7. (U) Command Relationships. Summarize the command arrangements to be employed on

execution.

8. (U) Logistic Appraisal. Provide an estimate of logistic feasibility for the plan.

9. (U) Personnel Appraisal. Provide an estimate of personnel feasibility for this plan.

10. (U) Consolidated Listing and Impact Assessment of Shortfalls and Limiting Factors. Provide

a consolidated listing and impact assessment of force, movement, and support shortfalls and

limiting factors that impact significantly on the conduct of operations. Identify shortfalls in joint

and Service doctrine, interoperability, and training. Specify the tasks that cannot be accomplished

in view of the shortfalls. Include specific documentation of each significant shortfall and limiting

factor and the efforts to resolve it in the appropriate annex to the plan. Address additional forces,

including combat support and combat service support, recommended by the supported commander

to reduce risk but not allocated in the plan summary. Do not include such forces in Appendix 2 to

Annex A (Task Organization) of the plan.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT

Name

Rank and Service

Title

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

137

SAMPLE FORMAT OF A BASIC ORDER OR

LAN

CLASSIFICATION

Copy no. of

copies

OFFICIAL DESIGNATION OF COMMAND

PLACE OF ISSUE

Date-time group

Message reference number

OPERATION ORDER OR PLAN (Number) (Operation CODE WORD) (U)

TITLE (U)

REFERENCES: List any maps, charts, standing operating procedures, or other documents

essential to understanding the order or plan.

(U) TIME ZONE: Enter if area of operations is different than place of issue.

(U) TASK ORGANIZATION. Annex A.

1. (U) Situation

a.(U) General. (May be omitted.) Describe the general politico-military environment that

would establish the probable preconditions for execution of the plan. If applicable, state US

policy goals and the estimated goals of other parties and outline political decisions needed

from other countries to achieve US policy goals and conduct effective US military operations

to accomplish US military missions. Similarly, this paragraph can also contain the results of

the commander’s design, providing the larger context for the plan or order by explaining his/her

understanding of the operational environment and the nature of the problem that the mission

statement and concept of operations are meant to solve.

b. (U) Battlespace

(1) (U) Joint Operations Area/Higher Commander’s Area of Operations. Describe the

higher commander’s area of operations. A map may also be included.

(2) (U) Area of Interest. Describe the commander’s area of interest covered by the basic

operation order or plan. This description should address all air, ground, and maritime areas

that directly affect the operation. A map may also be included.

(3) (U) Area of Operations. Describe the specific area covered by the operation. A map may

also be included.

c. (U) Enemy Forces. Identify the opposing forces expected on execution (location,

disposition) and appraise their general capabilities and possible actions (defend, reinforce,

attack, withdraw, and delay). Address enemy information that is vital for the entire command

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

138

CLASSIFICATION

or is likely to affect mission accomplishment. See Annex B (Intelligence) for details. Address

known or potential unconventional, terrorist, separatist, criminal, etc. threats, as appropriate.

When applicable, identify the enemy’s operational and tactical center(s) of gravity.

d. (U) Friendly Forces

(1) (U) This paragraph provides information on nonorganic forces having a bearing on the

operation. The information is presented in the following order:

(a) (U) Higher. State the mission statement and commander’s intent of the higher

commander.

(b) (U) Adjacent. State the mission statement or relevant tasks of adjacent commanders.

(operational control, tactical control, general support, direct support) or relevant tasks

of supporting commanders.

(2) (U) Identify applicable friendly centers of gravity that require support and protection

for successful mission accomplishment.

(3) (U) If applicable, list the tasks of government, international, nongovernment, host

nation, and private sector departments, agencies, and organizations associated with the

operation, such as Department of State, Doctors Without Borders, or Red Cross.

e. (U) Civilian Populace. List circumstances or factors regarding tribes, clans, religious, or

ethnic groups that can impact operations.

f. (U) Attachments and Detachments. List nonorganic units attached to or units detached from

the issuing headquarters. As appropriate, state “See Task Organization.” If no units are

attached or detached, state “None.”

g. (U) Assumptions. (Omitted in operation orders.) List all assumptions on which the plan is

based.

h. (U) Legal Considerations. List those significant legal considerations on which the plan is

based, such as status of forces agreements or law of land warfare.

2. (U) Mission. A concise statement of the tasks and purpose of the operation. State the who,

what, when, where, why, and as much of the how as necessary to ensure command, control, and

coordination. The who, what, when, and where are derived from the essential tasks. The why is

derived from the purpose of the operation.

3. (U) Execution

a. (U) Commander’s Intent. Commander’s intent is the commander’s personal expression of

the purpose of the operation. This paragraph contains the purpose from the mission statement

as well as any additional information related to purpose that allows subordinate commanders

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

139

CLASSIFICATION

to exercise proper initiative if the task they are assigned is no longer appropriate to the situation.

It may include the desired end state.

b. (U) Concept of Operations. A written statement and graphic that clearly and concisely

express what the commander intends to accomplish and how it will be done using available

resources. The concept of operations provides a basis for supporting concepts, such as—

(1) (U) Concept of Maneuver. See Annex C (Operations) and Annex W (Aviation

Operations) for detailed description.

(2) (U) Concept of Fires. See Annex C (Operations) and Annex W (Aviation Operations)

(if applicable) for detailed description.

(3) (U) Concept of Support. See Annex D (Logistics/Combat Service Support) for detailed

description.

(4) (U) Other Concepts as Required. See appropriate annex for detailed description.

c. (U) Tasks

(1) (U) List the tasks assigned to each subordinate commander in separate, numbered

subparagraphs. Tasks are listed in order of priority or accomplishment. Tasks may be listed

by phase. Designation of main effort or supporting effort is noted in tasking.

(2) (U) All tactical tasks must be listed in the body of the basic order. The highest priority

task(s) to subordinates must include the task and purpose (in order to …) Additional tasks

may simply be listed, if the purpose is understood. The commander assigns subordinate

commanders tasks deemed necessary to fulfill the concept of operations. The

synchronization matrix is the chief resource for assigning tasks to subordinates.

(3) (U) Unit or element task assignments are listed in the following order:

(a) (U) Offensive Operations. Ground combat units or elements (infantry first followed

by artillery and combat support units numerically or alphabetically), aviation combat

units or elements (aircraft units, combat support, combat service support), combat

service support units or logistic elements.

(b) (U) Defensive Operations. Units or elements closest to the enemy are listed first.

Ground and aviation combat units in the forward defense area are then listed in

numerical order. Other units are listed alphabetically after that.

(4) (U) Each task assignment may begin with the assets (attached or in support) available

to the unit or element.

d. (U) Reserve. List the tasks assigned to the reserve force. To ensure responsiveness and

success, list planning priorities for the reserve unit (e.g., Planning Priority #1: Be prepared to

conduct exploitation operations in vicinity of MEF Objective 3). If the unit or element will be

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

140

CLASSIFICATION

the reserve in the future, their current assigned tasks will be listed in paragraph 3c. If a unit or

element in reserve is given a future task or ordered to prepare plans for possible reserve

missions, it is included in this subparagraph.

e. (U) Commander’s Critical Information Requirements. Commander’s critical information

requirements identify information the commander has deemed critical to maintaining his/her

situational awareness, planning future activities, and assisting in timely and informed

decision-making. They help the commander tailor the command and control organization and

are central to effective information management, which directs the processing, flow, and use

of information throughout the force. Commander’s critical information requirements consist

of priority intelligence requirements and friendly force information requirements.

Commander’s critical information requirements will be numbered (e.g., PIR #1: Is the 2d

Centralian Armored Brigade crossing the Green River?). Each numbered priority intelligence

requirement and friendly force information requirement will include anticipated decisions and

associated branches and sequels, as developed during the Marine Corps Planning Process.

Operations divided into multiple phases may have separate commander’s critical information

requirements lists for each phase.

f. (U) Coordinating Instructions. List the instructions applicable to the entire command or two

or more elements of the command that are necessary for proper coordination of the operation

but are not appropriate for inclusion in a particular annex. They should establish the conditions

for execution and provide information about the timing of execution and deployments.

4. (U) Administration and Logistics

a. (U) Personnel. In preparing this paragraph, refer to Annex E (Personnel). Identify detailed

planning requirements and subordinate taskings. Assign tasks for establishing and operating

personnel facilities, managing accurate and timely personnel accountability and strength

reporting, and making provisions for staffing. Discuss the administrative management of

participating personnel, the reconstitution of forces, command replacement and rotation

policies, and required individual augmentation to command headquarters and other operational

requirements.

b. (U) Logistics. In preparing a basic operation order or plan, refer to Annex D

(Logistics/Combat Service Support). Logistic phases are normally concurrent with operational

phases. This subparagraph should address sustainment priorities and resources, base

development and other civil engineering requirements, host-nation support, and inter-Service

responsibilities. Identify the priority and movement of major logistic items for each option and

phase of the concept. Identify strategic and theater ports for resupply. Outline transportation

policies, guidance, and procedures for all options. Identify logistic and transportation

assumptions and include them with other plan assumptions in subparagraph 1g (Assumptions).

Identify detailed planning requirements and subordinate taskings.

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

141

CLASSIFICATION

c. (U) Communication Strategy and Operations. Include appropriate information in this

subparagraph or refer to Appendix 4 of Annex I (Information).

d. (U) Civil-Military Operations. Include appropriate information in this subparagraph or refer

to Annex G (Civil-Military Operations).

e. (U) Meteorological and Oceanographic Services. Include appropriate information in this

subparagraph or refer to Annex H (Meteorological and Oceanographic Operations).

f. (U) Geospatial Information and Services. Include appropriate information in this

subparagraph or refer to Annex M (Geospatial Information and Services).

g. (U) Medical Services. In preparing the basic operation order or plan, refer to Annex Q

(Medical Services). Identify planning requirements and subordinate taskings for hospitalization

and evacuation. Address critical medical supplies and resources. Refer to wartime host-nation

support agreements or provisions to support in Annex P (Host-Nation Support).

5. (U) Command and Signal

a. (U) Command Relationships. Include appropriate information in this subparagraph or refer

to Annex J (Command Relationships). Indicate any changes to major commands and the time

of the expected shift. Identify all existing memoranda of understanding and those that require

development.

b. (U) Command Posts and Headquarters. The command post is the headquarters echelon

(forward, main, rear) where the commander is located. List the designations and locations of

the issuing commander’s headquarters echelons and appropriate senior, adjacent, and

subordinate commanders’ headquarters echelons. When headquarters are to be displaced,

indicate the known or estimated location and time of opening of the new headquarters and

closing or displacing of the old headquarters.

c. (U) Succession to Command. Designate the succession of command for the operation.

d. (U) Signal. Include appropriate information in this subparagraph or refer to Annex K (Combat

Information Systems). Provide instructions or restrictions about communications-electronics,

such as radio restrictions, pyrotechnic signals, or lasers. Include a general statement concerning

the scope of communications system and procedures required to support the operation. Highlight

any communications system or procedures requiring special emphasis.

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

142

CLASSIFICATION

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT

Name

Rank and Service

Title

ANNEXES:

A–Task Organization

B–Intelligence

C–Operations

D–Logistics/Combat Service Support

E–Personnel

G–Civil-Military Operations

H–Meteorological and Oceanographic Operations

I–Information

J–Command Relationships

K–Combat Information Systems

L–Environmental Considerations

M–Geospatial Information and Services

N–Space Operations

P–Host-Nation Support

Q–Medical Services

R–Reports

S–Special Technical Operations

T–Network Engagement

U–Information Management

V–Interagency/Interorganizational Coordination

W–Aviation Operations

X–Execution Checklist

Z–Distribution

OFFICIAL:

s/ Name

Rank and Service

Title

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

143

SAMPLE FORMAT OF ANNEX A (TASK

RGANIZATION

)

Organization for combat is a commander’s plan for grouping organic and attached combat, combat

support, and combat service support units to effectively employ the forces to support the scheme

of maneuver. These groupings may be shown, if simple, in paragraph 3 of the basic OPORD or

OPLAN. If these groupings are complex, the task organization will be shown in a separate appendix

or just before paragraph 1 of the basic OPORD or OPLAN.

At a minimum, the task organization lists all major commands or task groupings directly

subordinate to the commander issuing the basic OPORD or OPLAN. In addition, all organizations

that directly support the operation are listed and designated as “support,” although they are not

under the command of the supported commander. Organizations to be established specifically to

implement the basic OPORD or OPLAN should appear in the task organization. The level of detail

in the task organization should only be that necessary to convey a clear understanding of the

significant forces committed to the operation. Commands may use either a graphic (e.g., wire

diagram) or a written format to display the task organization.

For written task organizations, underlining indicates that the unit or task grouping has an

assignedtask. Successive subordinate echelons of units or task groupings are shown by indentations

beneath the underlined unit or task grouping. Units or task groupings with no assigned task and not

included in another unit or task grouping are indented and listed immediately after the issuing

headquarters.

Subordinate units or task groupings that are assigned tasks are underlined and listed in appropriate

sequence. This sequence depends on two factors—the type of units or task groupings being

assigned missions and the type of mission (offensive or defensive). This sequence should parallel

the sequence of task assignments in paragraph 3 of the basic OPORD or OPLAN. The sequence

of listing major subordinate units or task groupings is—

 Offensive Operations: Ground combat units or elements (infantry units are listed first,

followed by artillery and combat support units numerically or alphabetically), aviation combat

units or elements (aircraft units, combat support, combat service support), and combat service

support units or logistic elements.

 Defensive Operations: Units or elements closest to the enemy are listed first. Ground and

aviation combat units in the forward defense area are then listed in numerical order followed

by other units alphabetically.

When the Marine Corps component commander prepares a supporting plan, Appendix 1 (Time-

Phased Force and Deployment List) must be included.

MCWP 5-10

144

CLASSIFICATION

Copy no. of

copies

OFFICIAL DESIGNATION OF COMMAND

PLACE OF ISSUE

Date-time group

Message reference number

ANNEX A TO OPERATION ORDER OR PLAN (Number) (Operation CODE WORD) (U)

TASK ORGANIZATION (U)

(U) REFERENCES: List maps, charts, standing operating procedures, or other documents essential

to understanding the order or plan.

ORGANIZATION

Issuing Headquarters

The first entry is the organization of the issuing headquarters.

Subordinate Unit or Task Grouping

Units or task groupings with no assigned tasks, and which are not

assigned to any other grouping, are indented under issuing

headquarters.

Subordinate Unit or Task Grouping

Subordinate units or task groupings with assigned tasks, and which are not assigned to any

other grouping, are indented under issuing headquarters.

Subordinate Unit or Task Grouping

Organic and attached units or task groupings are indented under the subordinate unit or task

grouping.

Units or task groupings that are not attached but will provide support are listed under the

supported unit or task grouping. The type of support, whether general support or direct

support, is shown in parentheses.

Reserve Unit or Task Grouping

Units or task groupings in reserve are listed last. If a unit or task grouping will be in reserve

in the future it is listed under reserve, as well as in its normal sequence.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT

Name

Rank and Service

Title

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

COMMANDER

Indicate names of

commanders of the

parent organization

and principal units

Marine Corps Planning Process

145

CLASSIFICATION

Appendices:

1–Time-Phased Force and Deployment List

2–Shortfall Identification

3–Flexible Response and Flexible Deterrent Options

OFFICIAL:

Name

Rank and Service

Title

Task Organization Graphic Example

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

146

SAMPLE FORMAT OF ANNEX B (INTELLIGENCE)

The purpose of Annex B (Intelligence) is to provide detailed information/intelligence on the

enemy/adversary and the battlespace and to provide guidance on intelligence and

counterintelligence functions.

The G-2/S-2 prepares the intelligence annex, based on the previously completed intelligence

estimate. This annex provides both encyclopedic data and current information on the

enemy/adversary, including order of battle, location and biographical information on

enemy/adversary commanders, capabilities, and intentions. One of the most important aspects

covered in the enemy/adversary’s intentions is the identification and discussion of the most likely

and most dangerous COAs.

The battlespace also includes informat ion regarding climate, topography, geography, terrain

analysis, physical infrastructure (roads, power grids, information grids), cultural considerations

that affect the operation, political structure, and leadership. Much of this information may have

been previously provided in intelligence estimates and in intelligence reports and summaries

provided by national sources or HHQ. This information may be referenced in the intelligence

annex to reduce the size of the basic OPORD or OPLAN.

The intelligence annex normally provides intelligence preparation of the battlespace products to

help further planning and execution. They include such products as the situation template and

modified combined obstacle overlay. These products are normally found in Appendix 11

(Intelligence Estimate) or in Appendix 12 (Intelligence Products).

CLASSIFICATION

Copy no.___of

___

copies

OFFICIAL DESIGNATION OF COMMAND

PLACE OF ISSUE

Date-time group

Message reference number

ANNEX B TO OPERATION ORDER OR PLAN (Number) (Operation CODE WORD) (U)

INTELLIGENCE (U)

(U) REFERENCES:

(a) Maps and charts required for an understanding of this annex. Reference

Annex M

(Geospatial Information and Services).

(b) Documents providing intelligence required for planning. Including related annexes, such

as Annex H (Meteorological and Oceanographic Operations).

(d) Appropriate standing operating procedures and other documents providing guidance on

intelligence operations.

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

147

CLASSIFICATION

(e) The originator of the annex should ensure that the units receiving or executing the plan or

order have the cited references.

1. (U) Situation

a. (U) Characteristics of the Area. Summarize the conditions of the battlespace as they may

influence the operation. Describe, as appropriate, the physical, economic, political, medical,

social, religious, and psychological aspects and conditions of the people and infrastructure in

the battlespace. Do not repeat information included in the general situation paragraph of the

basic operation order or plan or detailed information contained in the appendices. Include

sufficient analysis of the battlespace to permit development of appropriate supporting plans.

Include complete information or reference documents and reports containing required

intelligence.

b. (U) Hydrographic, Amphibious, Topographic, and Weather

(1) (U) Summarize the hydrographic data and amphibious considerations needed to support

amphibious and logistic over-the-shore operations. Refer to Annex H (Meteorological and

Oceanographic Operations) and Annex M (Geospatial Information and Services).

(2) (U) Address topographic aspects, including trafficability, key terrain, obstacles, cover,

concealment, and avenues of approach. Reference Annex M (Geospatial Information and

Services).

(3) (U) Include, as appropriate, climate and weather aspects of the battlespace. Coordinate

with the staff weather officer or oceanographer and refer to reference Annex H

(Meteorological and Oceanographic Operations).

c. ( U ) Estimate of Enemy/Adversary Capabilities. Summarize the enemy’s/adversary’s

situation, capabilities, and possible courses of action. Provide the enemy’s/adversary’s order

of battle, estimates of the enemy’s/adversary’s strengths and weaknesses, and, at a minimum,

the enemy’s/adversary’s most likely and most dangerous courses of action. When summarizing

the enemy/adversary situation, refer to the general situation paragraph of the basic operation

order or plan or refer to documents containing the required intelligence. Outline the

enemy’s/adversary’s capability to collect, communicate to intelligence centers, process, and

disseminate intelligence. Include specific intelligence cutoff dates and, when possible, identify

finished intelligence products supporting these findings.

2. (U) Mission and Concept of Intelligence Operations

a. (U) Mission. State the command’s mission in the basic operation order or plan.

b. (U) Concept of Intelligence Operations. Outline the purpose of intelligence operations and

summarize the means and agencies used in planning, directing, collecting, processing,

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

148

CLASSIFICATION

exploiting, producing, disseminating, and evaluating the necessary intelli- gence. When

available and appropriate, integrate the resources of other Services and allied nations.

3. (U) Intelligence Activities. Identify intelligence resources and the intelligence planning,

direction, collection, processing, production, dissemination, and evaluating efforts required to

support the basic operation order or plan. Identify the required intelligence by proceeding from the

priority intelligence requirements, through intelligence operations and capabilities or resources

planning, to tasking of intelligence elements, including the following specific areas:

a. (U) Planning and Direction. Provide guidance for determining intelligence requirements

(including those of subordinate commanders), preparing a collection plan, issuing orders and

requests to information collection agencies, and monitoring the performance of collection

agencies. Specify all exceptions to standard procedures.

(1) (U) Priority Intelligence Requirements. List priority intelligence requirements. If

Annex B (Intelligence) is not published, list the priority intelligence require- ments and

other requirements for intelligence in the coordinating instructions of the basic operation

order or plan. When the priority intelligence requirements and other requirements for

intelligence are lengthy and detailed, place them in Appendix 1 (Priority Intelligence

Requirements) of this annex.

(2) (U) New Requirements. Provide specific guidance for new intelligence requirements

during peace, crisis, and war, both before and during execution.

b. (U) Processing and Exploitation. Provide appropriate guidance for converting information

into usable form, including required provisions for document translation; imagery, signals,

and technical sensor processing and interpretation; and other pertinent processing activity.

c. (U) Production. Provide guidance on analyzing and reporting collected intelligence

information by all collection sources used in support of the plan. Include guidance on

multidiscipline reports that fuse information from multiple sources. Reference appro- priate

regulations, directives, and standing operating procedures specifying US-only and

multinational reporting procedures. Identify the production effort, including any intelligence

and counterintelligence products, required to support the plan.

d. (U) Dissemination. Provide necessary guidance for conveying intelligence to appropriate

units. Establish procedures and criteria to satisfy expanded requirements for vertical and

lateral dissemination of finished intelligence and spot reports. Establish alternate means to

ensure that the required intelligence will be provided to combat units as well as headquarters

during crises and combat operations. Cover any of the following in this subparagraph:

(1) (U) Intelligence reports required from units (periods covered, distribution, and time

of distribution).

(2) (U) Formats for intelligence reports (appendices, if required).

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

149

CLASSIFICATION

(3) (U) Distribution of intelligence studies.

(4) (U) Requirements for releasability to allied nations.

(5) (U) Requirements for secondary imagery dissemination.

4. (U) Assignment of Intelligence Tasks

a. (U) Orders to Subordinate and Attached Units. Use separate, numbered subparagraphs to

list detailed instructions for each unit performing intelligence functions, including the

originating headquarters, separate intelligence support units, and allied or coalition forces.

b. (U) Requests to Higher, Adjacent, and Cooperating Units. Provide separate, numbered

subparagraphs applicable to each unit not organic or attached and from which intelligence

support is requested, including allied or coalition forces.

c. (U) Coordinating Instructions. Provide any instructions necessary for coordinating

collection and processing and exploitation, producing, and disseminating activities. Include—

(1) (U) Periodic or special conferences for intelligence officers.

(2) (U) Intelligence liaison, when indicated, with adjacent commanders, foreign

government agencies or military forces, and host countries.

5. (U) Communications System. Summarize the US and non-US communications system and

procedures to be used to carry out the intelligence function or reference the appropri- ate

paragraphs of Annex K (Combat Information Systems). Include comments on interop- erability of

these communications system.

6. (U) Miscellaneous Instructions. List under separate subparagraphs required items or

information not covered above or in standing operating procedures, or items that require action

different from that provided in standing operating procedures. As appropriate, include items, such

as operations security, deception, disclosure of intelligence, releasability to coalition forces and

communication strategy and operations, use of specialized intelligence personnel and personnel

augmentation requirements, and exploitation of captured foreign materiel and documents.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT

Name

Rank and Service

Title

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

150

CLASSIFICATION

Appendices:

1–Priority Intelligence Requirements

2–Signals Intelligence

3–Counterintelligence

4–Targeting Intelligence

5–Human Resource Intelligence

6–Intelligence Support to Operations in the Information Environment

7–Imagery Intelligence

8–Measurement and Signature Intelligence

9–Captured Enemy Equipment

10–National Intelligence Support Team

11–Intelligence Estimate

12–Intelligence Products

13–Intelligence Collection Plan

14–Reconnaissance and Surveillance Plan

15–Geographic Intelligence

16–Intelligence Operations

17–Support to Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape

OFFICIAL:

Name

Rank and Service

Title

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

151

SAMPLE FORMAT OF ANNEX C

PERATIONS

)

Annex C (Operations) provides substantive guidance for planning the conduct of operations.

Annex C should amplify information and concepts from the basic OPORD. Simply repeating

paragraphs and diagrams from the basic OPORD is counterproductive. Plans for the employment

of non-US forces should include proposed command arrangements and, as necessary,

consideration of requirements for furnishing essential combat and logistic support.

CLASSIFICATION

Copy no.___of

___

copies

OFFICIAL DESIGNATION OF COMMAND

PLACE OF ISSUE

Date-time group

Message reference number

ANNEX C TO OPERATION ORDER OR PLAN (Number) (Operation CODE WORD) (U)

OPERATIONS (U)

(U) REFERENCES: List other plans, standing operating procedures, and doctrinal guidance to be

followed in the conduct of operations.

1. (U) General

a. (U) Purpose. This annex provides amplifying guidance for the conduct of operations.

b. (U) Mission. State the mission as described in the basic operation order or plan.

c. (U) Area of Operations. Define the area of operations encompassed by the basic order or

plan to include land, sea, and air space. The annex should also define any areas where

reconnaissance and surveillance operations are authorized.

d. (U) Situation. Refer to the basic operation order or plan.

2. (U) Concept of Operations. Normally, the concept of operations is included in the basic

operation order or plan; however, when lengthy and detailed, place it here. The format and content

are similar to the concept of operations in the basic operation order or plan. Refer to Appendix 16

(Operations Overlay).

3. (U) Conduct of Operations. Provide any guidance required for the conduct of specific operations

that is not already included in the basic OPORD. Provide an overview of any of the included

Annex C appendices and tabs, as appropriate.

4. (U) Operational Constraints. List any constraints to the conduct of combat operations not

enumerated elsewhere, such as the impact of deployment or employment of forces and materiel

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

152

CLASSIFICATION

on airfield ramp space including possible host-nation support. Estimate the impact of these

operational constraints and indicate how the concept of operations and tasks to subordinate

commanders would be modified if these constraints were removed. State the effect of incremental

removal of constraints.

5. (U) Command and Signal

a. (U) Command. Refer to the basic operation order or plan.

b. (U) Signal. Refer to the basic operation order or plan or to Annex K (Combat Information

Systems).

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT

Name

Rank and Service

Title

APPENDICES:

1–Nuclear Operations

2–Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Defense Operations

3–Special Operations

4–Evasion and Recovery Operations

5–Risk

6–Rules of Engagement

7–Reconnaissance

8–Air Base Operability

9–Noncombatant Evacuation Operations

10–Explosive Ordnance Disposal

11–Amphibious Operations

12–Force Protection

13–Rear Area Operations

14–Cyberspace Operations

15-Liaison Plan

16–Operations Overlay

17–Fire Support

18–Countermechanized Plan

19–Obstacle and Barrier Plan

20–Breaching Plan

21-Decision Support Matrix and Template

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

153

CLASSIFICATION

22-Operation Assessment Plan

23-Enemy Prisoners of War and Civilian Internees Plan

24-Authorities Matrix

OFFICIAL:

s/ Name

Rank and Service

Title

MCWP 5-10

154

SAMPLE FORMAT OF APPENDIX

(OPERATIONS OVERLAY) TO ANNEX

CLASSIFICATION

Copy no.___of

___

copies

OFFICIAL DESIGNATION OF COMMAND

PLACE OF ISSUE

Date-time group

Message reference number

APPENDIX 16 TO ANNEX C TO OPERATION ORDER OR PLAN (Number) (Operation

CODE WORD) (U)

OPERATIONS OVERLAY (U)

Use appropriate marks and graphics from MIL-STD-2525D, Department of Defense Interface

Standard: Joint Military Symbology, to visually depict desired aspects of the operation. If the

operation is divided into phases, stages, etc., this appendix may require multiple overlays. The

basis of the operations overlay is the approved course of action graphic. The overlay must provide

a clear depiction of the CONOPS. The overlay strikes a correct balance between necessary detail

and simplicity. Creating an overly dense and cluttered operations overlay is counterproductive.

The overlay may depict—

 Form of maneuver

 Main effort purpose and tasks

 Supporting effort purposes and tasks

 Reserve (location, priorities)

 Control measures (FSCMs, maneuver control measures, ACMs, etc.)

 Boundaries

 Objectives

 Command posts

 Rear area boundaries and associated unit (e.g., RACOM)

 Named areas of interest

 Target areas of interest

 Combat service support areas

 Airfields

 Beaches

 Ports

 Forward arming and refueling point

 Intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance locations

 Enemy/adversary forces

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

155

CLASSIFICATION

 Adjacent forces

 Civilian groups

 Routes and axes

 Obstacles

 Essential fire support tasks

 Operations in the information environment support tasks

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT

Name

Rank and Service

Title

OFFICIAL:

s/ Name

Rank and Service

Title

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

156

SAMPLE FORMAT OF ANNEX D (LOGISTICS/COMBAT SERVICE SUPPORT)

Logistics is the science of planning and carrying out the movement and maintenance of forces. It

includes the provision of combat service support to forces at the tactical level of war as well as the

movement and sustainment of Marine forces at the operational level of war. Logistics provides the

commander with the means to conduct and win battles, campaigns, and, ultimately, the war. Annex

D (Logistics/Combat Service Support) provides direction and guidance to the subordinate

commanders and staffs on the provision of logistics and combat service support in support of

operations described in the OPORD or OPLAN. The theory and philosophy of logistics as

practiced by the Marine Corps is provided in MCDP 4, Logistics. MCTP 3-40.B, Tactical-Level

Logistics, provides detailed information on combat service support as well as amplifying

instructions on the preparation of logistic planning documents.

The command and control of logistic and combat service support organizations, to include

command relationships and command and control support requirements, should be addressed in

annex D. It provides a general discussion of how the operation will be supported and is fully

integrated with other critical concepts, such as maneuver, fires, and force protection. It requires

only as much depth as is necessary to ensure understanding of envisioned logistic combat service

support operations by subordinate commanders and staffs. The G-4/S-4 is normally responsible

for the preparation of annex D; however, the logistic combat element should be involved in the

planning process. Phasing and significant anticipated changes in mission or tasks should be

reflected in the concept of support. Detailed or specialized information should be provided in other

subparagraphs or in appendices of annex D. Discuss or refer to aviation-specific logistic functions,

such as supply and maintenance, in Appendix 1 (Supply) or in the aviation combat element

OPORD or OPLAN.

Marine Corps Planning Process

157

CLASSIFICATION

Copy no. of

copies

OFFICIAL DESIGNATION OF COMMAND

PLACE OF ISSUE

Date-time group

Message reference number

ANNEX D TO OPERATION ORDER OR PLAN (Number) (Operation CODE WORD) (U)

LOGISTICS/COMBAT SERVICE SUPPORT (U)

(U) REFERENCES: Cite references necessary for a complete understanding of this annex.

1. (U) Situation

a. (U) Enemy. Refer to Annex B (Intelligence). Provide available information on enemy

actions or intent to conduct actions to disrupt or degrade envisioned friendly logistic and combat

service support operations. Include information on enemy capabilities or assets that can

augment friendly logistic and combat service support operations.

b. (U) Friendly. List supporting logistic or combat service support organizations not

subordinate to the force and the specific missions and tasks assigned to each.

c. (U) Infrastructure. Refer to Annex B (Intelligence). Provide information on existing

infrastructure, such as ports, factories, fuel and water sources, and lines of communications

that can be used to support friendly logistic and combat service support operations.

d. (U) Attachments and Detachments. Refer to Annex A (Task Organization). List logistic

and combat service support units from other Services/nations attached to the force. List all

Marine Corps logistic and combat service support units detached to support other friendly

forces.

e. (U) Assumptions. State realistic assumptions and consider the effect of current operations

on logistic capabilities. Omitted in orders.

f. (U) Resource Availability. Identify significant competing demands for logistic resources

where expected requirements may exceed resources. Include recommended solutions within

resource levels available for planning, if any, and reasonably assured host-nation support.

g. (U) Planning Factors. Refer to and use approved planning factors and formulas, except

when experience or local conditions dictate otherwise. When deviating from planning factors,

identify the factors and the reason.

2. (U) Mission. Provide the command’s mission from the base order.

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

158

CLASSIFICATION

3. (U) Execution

a. (U) Concept of Logistics and Combat Service Support. State the concept for logistics and

combat service support operations necessary to implement the order or plan. Describe how the

logistic and combat service support assets will be organized and positioned to execute the

mission. The concept may include planned employment of other Service and nation logistic

and combat service support forces, host-nation support logistic capabilities, or operation of the

lines of communications.

(U) Tasks

(1) (U) Assign logistic and combat service support responsibilities to subordinate logistic

organizations.

(2) (U) Identify and assign responsibility for logistics and combat service support required

from other commands, Services, or nations.

(3) (U) Identify and assign responsibility for logistics and combat service support required

for forces assigned or attached from other commands, Services, or nations.

(4) (U) Identify and assign responsibility for logistics and combat service support required

for Marine Corps forces assigned or attached to other commands, Services, or nations.

(5) (U) Assign responsibilities to support joint boards and committees, such as

transportation and procurement, and other Services or nations providing services.

4. (U) Administration and Logistics

a. (U) Logistics and Combat Service Support

(1) (U) Supply. Refer to Appendix 7 (Supply). Summarize the following, in coordination

with supporting commanders and Service component commanders, if different from

standard planning factors. Place detailed discussions in the appendices and listings of

supply depots, terminals, and lines of communications in tabs or the appropriate

appendices.

(a) (U) Distribution and Allocation

1 (U) Purpose, location, and projected displacement of main and alternate supply

depots or points and supporting terminals and ports to be used or considered.

2 (U) Prepositioned logistic resource allocation.

3 (U) Existing terminals and lines of communications and the known or estimated

throughput capability. Indicate the time-phased expansion necessary to support the

plan.

(b) (U) Level of Supply

1 (U) Indicate the time-phased operating and safety levels required to support

the plan.

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

159

CLASSIFICATION

2 (U) Indicate the prepositioned war reserve materiel requirements to support the

time-phased deployments pending resupply.

3 (U) Specify significant special arrangements required for materiel support

beyond normal supply procedures.

4 (U) Indicate anticipated shortfalls.

5 (U) Indicate common user logistic supply support responsibilities and

arrangements.

collection, classification, and disposition of salvage.

(d) (U) Captured Enemy/Adversary Materiel. Provide instructions for the collection,

classification, and disposition of enemy/adversary materiel. See Annex B (Intelligence)

for further guidance. See Appendix 10 to Annex B (Intelligence) for specific

instructions for the disposition of captured enemy/adversary cryptographic equipment.

(e) (U) Local Acquisition of Supplies and Services. See Joint Publication 4-01, The

Defense Transportation System, and the current version of Department of Defense

Instruction 1100.22, Policy and Procedures for Determining Workforce Mix.

1 (U) Identify acquisition of goods and services in the following categories:

a (U) The general categories of materiel and services that are available and

contemplated as a supplement to regular sources.

b (U) Those that may be used as emergency acquisition sources.

2 (U) Make a statement concerning the dependability of the local acquisition or

labor source in each of the aforementioned categories and the joint or Service

element that will obtain or manage these resources.

3 (U) State that all essential contractor services, to include new and existing

contracts, have been reviewed to determine which services will be essential to

OPLAN execution. Make a statement concerning the existence of contingency

plans to ensure the continuation of these essential services.

(f) (U) Petroleum, Oils, and Lubricants. Refer to Appendix 1 (Petroleum, Oils, and

Lubricants Supply).

(2) (U) External Support. Refer to Appendix 11 (External Support). Provide the required

planning information including type and quantity of support and instructions where inter-

Service and cross-Service arrangements for common supply and service support are

appropriate.

(a) (U) Summarize major support arrangements that are presently in effect or that will

be executed in support of the plan.

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

160

CLASSIFICATION

(b) (U) Include significant inter-Service and cross-Service support arrange- ments.

Refer to appropriate annexes or appendices.

(3) (U) Maintenance

(a) (U) General. Refer to Appendix 12 (Maintenance).

(b) (U) Specific Guidance

1 (U) Include sufficient detail to determine the requirements for maintenance

facilities needed to support the plan.

2 (U) Indicate the level of maintenance to be performed and where it is to occur,

including host nation or contractor facilities, if applicable.

(4) (U) Transportation

(a) (U) General. Refer to Appendix 4 (Mobility and Transportation). Provide general

planning or execution guidance to subordinate and supporting organi- zations to

facilitate transportation of the force and its sustainment. This can include movement

and use priorities.

(b) (U) Mobility Support Force and Movement Feasibility Analysis. Provide an

estimate of the mobility support and movement feasibility of the plan. Include in the

analysis any appropriate remarks affecting mobility and transportation tasks. Consider

the availability of adequate lift resources for movements of personnel and equipment,

airfield reception capabilities, seaport and aerial port terminal capabilities, and port

throughput capabilities. Also, consider any features that will adversely affect

movement operations, such as the effect of deployment or employment of forces and

materiel on airfield ramp space (to include possible host-nation support).

(5) (U) General Engineering Support Plan. Refer to Appendix 13 (General Engineering).

State the rationale if Appendix 5 (Civil Engineering Support Plan) is not prepared. Indicate

the general engineering support activities applicable to the basic operation order or plan

and the policies for providing these services.

(6) (U) Health Services. Refer to Appendix 9 (Health Services).

(7) (U) Services. Refer to Appendix 8 (Services).

(8) (U) Mortuary Affairs. Refer to Appendix 2 (Mortuary Affairs) or, if not used, indicate

the mortuary affairs activities applicable to the operation order or plan and policy for

providing these affairs.

(9) (U) Ammunition. Refer to Appendix 6 (Nonnuclear Ammunition) or if not used, discuss

any critical ammunition issues that may affect the ability of the force to accomplish the

mission.

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

161

CLASSIFICATION

(10) (U) Aviation Logistic Support. Refer to Appendix 10 (Aviation Logistic Support) or

Annex D (Logistics/Combat Service Support) of the aviation combat ele- ment operation

order or plan. Critical aviation logistic and combat service support issues may be discussed

if they affect the ability of the force to accomplish the mission.

(11) (U) Operational Security Planning Guidance for Logistics. Refer to Appendix 11

(Operations Security) to Annex I (Information). Provide comprehensive operations

security planning guidance for planning, preparing, and executing logistic and combat

service support activities. At a minimum, address base, facility, installation, logistic

stocks, physical, and line of communications security. Provide guidance to ensure that

logistic and combat service support activities promote essential secrecy for operational

intentions, capabilities that will be committed to specific missions, and current preparatory

operational activities.

b. (U) Administration. Include general administrative guidance to support logistic and combat

service support operations for the basic operation order or plan. If reports are required, specify

formats for preparation, time, methods, and classification of sub- mission.

5. (U) Command and Signal

a. (U) Command Relationships. Refer to Annex J (Command Relationships) for command

relationships external to logistic units. Provide support relationships.

b. (U) Communications System. Refer to Annex K (Combat Information Systems) for detailed

communications and information systems requirements. Provide a general statement of the

scope and type of communications required.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT

Name

Rank and Service

Title

Appendices:

1–Petroleum, Oils, and Lubricants Supply

2–Mortuary Affairs

3–Sustainability Analysis

4–Mobility and Transportation

5–Civil Engineering Support Plan

6–Nonnuclear Ammunition

7–Supply

8–Services

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

162

CLASSIFICATION

9–Health Services

10–Aviation Logistic Support (Normally provided in the aviation combat element plan or order.)

11–External Support

12–Maintenance

13–General Engineering

OFFICIAL:

s/ Name

Rank and Service

Title

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

163

SAMPLE FORMAT OF ANNEX I (INFORMATION)

Operations in the information environment are actions taken to generate, preserve, or apply military

information power in order to increase and protect competitive advantage or combat power

potential within all domains of the operational environment. Military information power is broadly

applicable in competition and war, and is a necessary mutually supporting element to combat

power. The Marine Corps defines military information power as “the total means of force or

information capability applied against a relevant actor to enhance lethality, survivability, mobility,

or influence.”

The essence of military information power is the ability to exert one’s will or

influence over an opponent through the generation, preservation, denial, or projection of

information.

Annex I (Information) provides an integration framework for the information warfighting function

by ensuring Marine Corps operations in the information environment are planned in concert with

MAGTF operations in all domains to create and exploit military information power. Marine Corps

operations in the information environment are persistently conducted in global campaigns

throughout the competition continuum and during armed conflict to support naval, Service,

combatant command, and joint force objectives in the information environment and across all

domains. In all cases, operations in the information environment are planned and executed in

accordance with the following seven functions/tasks:

(1) Assure enterprise C2 and critical systems

(2) Provide information environment battlespace awareness

(3) Attack and exploit networks, systems, and information

(4) Inform domestic and international audiences

(5) Influence foreign target audiences

(6) Deceive foreign target audiences

(7) Control operations in the information environment capabilities, resources, and activities

Marine Corps operations in the information environment are planned and executed using the means

provided by the following six capability areas:

(1) Electromagnetic spectrum operations (EMSO)

(2) Cyberspace operations

(3) Space operations

(4) Influence operations

(5) Deception operations

(6) Inform operations

Operations in the information environment take place across the full range of military

operations. MAGTF information plans must be nested within the joint force commander’s plan.

Information planning requires a whole-of-staff or whole-of-operational planning team approach

and extensive coordination among commands to avoid conflicts and to ensure nested and reinforcing

efforts. As in other areas, intelligence support to operations in the information environment is

critical.

MCWP 5-10

164

The information annex should clearly state the primary tasks of each of the applicable seven

functions/tasks of operations in the information environment. Tasks should identify how a

specific capability within a capability area will be used to accomplish the task. Tasks may also

include how a specific capability associated other warfighting functions (e.g., fires and maneuver)

may be used to accomplish or support the accomplishment of the information tasks. For example,

the primary information function/task “Assure Command and Control” may require the physical

attack (e.g., air delivered fires) of enemy long range precision fires targeting friendly C2 nodes.

This same task may also require the use of defensive cyberspace operations, electronic attack, and

electronic warfare support. The information annex should provide enough guidance to ensure

that these elements are all working toward the accomplishment of operations in the information

environment as well as detailed execution instructions for each of the capabilities required in the

subsequent tabs.

Marine Corps Planning Process

165

CLASSIFICATION

Copy no. of

copies

OFFICIAL DESIGNATION OF COMMAND

PLACE OF ISSUE

Date-time group

Message reference number

ANNEX I TO OPERATION ORDER OR PLAN (Number) (Operation CODE WORD) (U)

INFORMATION (U)

(U) REFERENCES:

(a) Any relevant plans or orders.

(b) Required maps and charts.

1. (U) Situation. Summarize the overall operational situation as it relates to operations in the

information environment.

a.(U) E n em y/ Adversary. Summarize the enemy/adversary situation, force disposition,

intelligence capabilities, and possible courses of action. If applicable, reference intelligence

estimates or summaries. Address any specific information that bears directly on the planned

operations in the information environment.

b.(U) Friendly. Summarize the situation of those friendly forces that may directly affect

attainment of information objectives. Address any critical limitations and any other planned

operations in the information environment.

c.(U) Assumptions. List any assumptions made of friendly, enemy, adversary, or third party

capabilities, limitations, or courses of action. Describe the conditions that the commander

believes will exist at the time the plan becomes an order. Omit in orders.

2. (U) Mission. Provide the command’s mission from the basic OPORD.

3. (U) Execution

a. (U) Concept of Support. Summarize how the commander visualizes the execution of

operations in the information environment from its beginning to its termination. Describe how

information will support the command’s mission. Describe the integration of the applicable

information tasks within the CONOPS and overall plan. Summarize the concepts for

supervision and termination of operations in the information environment.

(1) (U) The concept of support may be a single paragraph or divided into two or more

paragraphs depending upon the complexity of the operation.

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

166

CLASSIFICATION

(2) (U) When an operation involves various phases, such as peace or pre-hostilities, crisis,

war, or post-hostilities, the concept of support should include subparagraphs describing the

role of information tasks in each phase.

b. (U) Operations in the Information Environment Tasks. Identify the major tasks for each of

the applicable seven functions/tasks of operations in the information environment. As

operations in the information environment tasks and capability areas cross various units and

warfighting functions, specific tasks related to achieving information objectives may be found

elsewhere in the order (e.g., physical attack in unit tasks (Basic OPORD paragraph 3.c. (Tasks)

and Annex C, Appendix 17 (Fires Support); Communication Strategy and Operations tasks in

Annex I, Appendix 4, Tab A (Communication Strategy and Operations); etc.). This paragraph

lists information tasks not captured elsewhere in the OPORD.

(1) (U) Assure enterprise command and control and critical systems

(2) (U) Provide information environment battlespace awareness

(3) (U) Attack and exploit networks, systems, and information

(4) (U) Inform domestic and international audiences

(5) (U) Influence foreign target audiences

(6) (U) Deceive foreign target audiences

(7) (U) Control operations in the information environment capabilities, resources, and

activities

(9) (U) Electromagnetic spectrum operations

(10) (U) Cyberspace operations

(11) (U) Civil-military operations

(12) (U) Operations security

(13) (U) Signature Management

c. (U) Coordinating Instructions. Address any mutual support issues relating to the elements

of operations in the information environment.

4. (U) Administration and Logistics. Address any operations in the information environment

administrative or logistic requirements.

5. (U) Command and Control. List any operations in the information environment command and

control instructions. State the command structure for operations in the information environment.

Identify any special operations in the information environment communications and reporting

requirements.

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

167

CLASSIFICATION

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT

Name

Rank and Service

Title

APPENDICES:

1–Assure Enterprise Command and Control and Critical Systems

2–Provide Information Environment Battlespace Awareness

3–Attack and Exploit Networks, Systems, and Information

4–Inform Domestic and International Audiences

5–Influence Foreign Target Audiences

6–Deceive Foreign Target Audiences

7–Control Operations in the Information Environment Capabilities, Resources, and Activities

8–Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations

9–Cyberspace Operations

10–Civil Military Operations

11–Operations Security

OFFICIAL:

s/ Name

Rank and Service

Title

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

168

Sample Format for Tab

(Military Deception) to Appendix 6 to Annex

Tab A (Military Deception) provides background and guidance for the preparation of the military

deception tab of joint plans and orders. The process for military deception planning conducted in

support of joint operations is established in JP 3-13.4, Military Deception. As a general policy, any

material related to planned, ongoing, or completed military deception is accorded controlled

access. Production guidelines are—

 “Need-to-know,” for the purposes of military deception, this means limiting access

to those individuals who are involved in planning, approving, or executing deceptions and

who must have knowledge of the deception to perform their duties.

 The deception tab will normally be developed, published, distributed, and maintained

separately from the rest of the OPLAN.

 Standard administrative procedures are not used to distribute or staff the deception tab. Only

positive control means, such as hand-to-hand delivery or secure electronic communications

will be used to distribute deception-related material.

 Specific deception events, such as unit movements, may be included in the basic OPLAN

and its annexes if not identified as being deception related.

 Deception-related documents will have cover sheets with the appropriate classification

markings. They will be annotated in accordance with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

Instruction 3211.01, Joint Policy for Military Deception.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction 3211.01 establishes the review criteria for

deception concepts and plans. Deception planners must follow the specific administrative and

security procedures established by that document to ensure that their plans are approved by the

appropriate authority.

Marine Corps Planning Process

169

CLASSIFICATION

Copy no. of

copies

OFFICIAL DESIGNATION OF COMMAND

PLACE OF ISSUE

Date-time group

Message reference number

TAB A TO APPENDIX 6 TO ANNEX I TO OPERATION ORDER OR PLAN (Number)

(Operation CODE WORD) (U)

MILITARY DECEPTION (U)

(U) REFERENCES: Identify plans, documents, maps, and charts that are essential to the effective

execution of military deception.

1. (U) Situation

a. (U) General. See basic operation order or plan.

b. (U) Enemy

(1) (U) General Capabilities. Identify enemy military capabilities directly relating to the

planned deception.

(2) (U) Deception Targets. Describe the political, military, or economic decision makers (or

organizations) targeted by the deception plan. Include personalities, strengths, weaknesses,

vulnerabilities, and people or factors known to influence decisions.

(3) (U) Target Biases and Predispositions. Provide information on known biases and

predispositions of political, military, or economic decision makers (or organizations).

(4) (U) Probable Enemy Course of Action. Refer to Annex B (Intelligence).

c. (U) Friendly. Summarize the friendly situation, critical limitation, and concept of

operations.

d. (U) Assumptions. List all assumptions on which the deception is based.

2. (U) Mission

a. (U) Operational Mission. Extract from paragraph 2 of the basic operation order or plan.

b. (U) Deception Mission

(1) (U) Deception Goal. Describe the desired effect or the end state a commander wishes

to achieve (commander’s concept for the deception operation). For example, “To cause the

enemy to weight their defense in the eastern corridor, to mislead the enemy as to the time

and place of forcible entry operations, to cause dissension within the enemy coalition such

that…”

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

170

CLASSIFICATION

(2) (U) Deception Objective(s). List the desired action or inaction by the enemy at the

critical time and location.

(3) (U) Desired Enemy Perceptions. Describe what the deception target must believe for it

to make the decision that will achieve the deception objective.

(4) (U) Deception Story. Outline a scenario of friendly actions or capabilities that will be

portrayed to cause the deception target to adopt the desired perception. This could be an

alternate course of action to the one chosen for the basic operation order or plan itself.

3. (U) Execution

a. (U) Concept of the Operation

(1) (U) General. Describe the framework for the operation. Include a brief description of the

phases of the deception operation.

(2) (U) Other Operations in the Information Environment Elements. Discuss the use of other

operations in the information environment elements in support of the deception operation.

Discuss all other operations in the information environment element plans and activities

pertinent to the deception. Include coordination required to deconflict if necessary.

(3) (U) Feedback and Monitoring. Provide a general statement of the type of feedback

expected, if any, and how it will be collected (monitored). Include a brief statement on the

impact of the absence of feedback on the plan.

(4) (U) Means. Describe available deception assets.

(5) (U) Tasks. Specify execution and feedback taskings to organizations participating in the

execution and monitoring of the deception operation.

(6) (U) Risks. Give a brief risk analysis in the categories given below. Rate risk as low,

moderate, or high in each category. Refer to Exhibit 3 (Operations) to this tab for detailed

risk analyses.

(a) (U) Deception is successful. Include likely enemy/adversary response. Describe

impact on friendly forces from enemy/adversary intelligence sharing.

(b) (U) Deception fails. Describe the impact if the target ignores the deception or fails

in some way to take the actions intended.

b. (U) Coordinating Instructions. Identify any tasks or instructions pertaining to two or more

of the units listed in the preceding subparagraphs. List the tentative D-day and H-hour, if

applicable, and any other information required to ensure coordinated action between two or

more elements of the command.

4. (U) Administration and Logistics. State instructions regarding administrative and logistic

support procedures to be used in developing, coordinating, and implementing the deception plan.

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

171

CLASSIFICATION

Do not include those administrative, logistic, and medical actions or ploys that are an actual part

of the deception operation. Place detailed instructions in Exhibit 4 (Administration and Logistics).

a. (U) Administration

(1) (U) General. Outline general procedures to be employed during planning, coordination,

and implementation of deception activities.

(2) (U) Specific. Detail any special administrative measures needed to execute the

deception operation.

b. (U) Logistics. Detail logistic requirements for the execution of the deception operation,

such as the transportation of special material, or provision of printing equipment and materials.

Do not include executions conducted by logistic elements as part of the portrayal of

observables. Place detailed instructions in Exhibit 4 (Administration and Logistics).

c. (U) Costs. As applicable.

5. (U) Communications System

a. (U) Command Relationships. Use Exhibit 5 (Command Relationships) to illustrate

command relationships by phase, if required.

(1) (U) Approval. State approval authority for execution and termination.

(2) (U) Authority. Designate supported and supporting commanders, supporting agencies

as applicable, and any caveats to Exhibit 1 (Task Organization) or Exhibit 5 (Command

Relationships).

(3) (U) Oversight. Detail oversight responsibilities particularly for executions by

nonorganic units or organizations outside the chain of command.

(4) (U) Coordination. Identify coordination responsibilities and requirements related to

deception executions and execution feedback. Address in-theater and out-of- theater

requirements.

b. (U) Communications. Detail communications means and procedures to be used by control

personnel and participants in the deception operation. Include all reporting requirements.

6. (U) Security

a. (U) General. Outline general procedures to be employed during planning, coordination, and

implementation of deception activities.

b. (U) Specific. State access restrictions, handling instructions, and who has authority to grant

access to the deception appendix or plan. Describe the use of cover stories if applicable, code

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

172

CLASSIFICATION

words, nicknames, and procedures for planning and execution documents. If required, place

access rosters and other detailed security considerations in a separate document.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT

Name

Rank and Service

Title

EXHIBITS:

1–Task Organization

2–Intelligence

3–Operations

4–Administration and Logistics

5–Command Relationships

6–Execution Schedule

7–Distribution

OFFICIAL:

s/ Name

Rank and Service

Title

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

173

Sample Format of Exhibit 2

(Intelligence) to Tab A to Appendix 6 to Annex I

Information and intelligence provided here must be focused and specific to the deception. Do

not repeat information found in Annex B (Intelligence).

CLASSIFICATION

Copy no.___of___copies

OFFICIAL DESIGNATION OF COMMAND

PLACE OF ISSUE

Date-time group

Message reference number

EXHIBIT 2 TO TAB A TO APPENDIX 6 TO ANNEX I TO OPERATION ORDER OR PLAN

(Number) (Operation CODE WORD) (U)

INTELLIGENCE (U)

(U) REFERENCES: Identify plans, documents, maps, and charts that are essential to the execution

of the deception.

1. (U) Deception CONOPS. Provide a concise statement of the deception operation. Identify the

command executing the deception, the deception target, the deception objective(s), and the

duration of the operation.

2. (U) Situation

a. (U) Enemy/Adversary

(1) (U) Target Description. Describe the political, military, or economic decision makers

(or organizations) targeted by the deception plan. Include personalities, strengths,

weaknesses, vulnerabilities, and people or factors known to influence decisions.

(2) (U) Target Biases and Predispositions

(3) (U) Enemy/Adversary Intelligence Organizations. Identify the targeted country’s

intelligence organizations, their missions, and their methods and capabilities for covert and

clandestine operations. Include collection, processing, analysis, and dissemination.

Specifically note those organizations most likely to provide intelligence to the targeted

decisionmaker

and those tasked with exposing deception.

(4) (U) Enemy/Adversary Counterintelligence Organizations. Describe missions,

capabilities, and operations.

(5) (U) Enemy/Adversary Intelligence-Sharing with Other Countries. Identify other

intelligence organizations available to the targeted country, the nature of intelligence

exchange, and the potential for using that relationship for the deception.

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

174

CLASSIFICATION

(6) (U) Other Sources and Related Matters. Identify scientific, technical, diplomatic, or

academic contacts that might act as information conduits.

(7) (U) Deception and Denial Activities. Provide an analysis of the targeted country’s use

of deception and denial in support of its political and military goals. Identify the target’s

deception and denial methods and current deception and denial activities.

(8) (U) Target Reaction. Provide an estimate of the target’s reaction if the deception is

successful. Also provide likely target reactions if the deception is not successful. Identify

whether the enemy/adversary would use deception in response. This subparagraph

provides in-depth information to document the risk assessments presented in Tab I-6-A

(Military Deception) and Exhibit I-6-A-3 (Information).

(9) (U) Third-Party Reaction. Provide an analysis of the impact of the deception on allies,

neutrals, and potential enemy/adversaries and their responses. This subparagraph provides

in depth information to document the risk assessments presented in Tab I-6-A (Military

Deception) and Exhibit I-6-A-3 (Information).

b.(U) Friendly. Provide information on activities by unknowing US forces having an impact

on the deception. Compare the time necessary to collect, process, report, and analyze

intelligence (in support of deception) with the plan’s operational timeline. Assess the impact

here.

3. (U) Intelligence Requirements

a. (U) Priority Intelligence Requirements. Priority information requirements associated

with deception are listed in Attachment A (Priority Intelligence Requirements).

b. (U) Feedback. Assess the intelligence community’s ability to identify and collect plan-

specific feedback information.

c. (U) Assignment of Intelligence Tasks. Identify organizations to produce plan-specific

collection requirements.

(1) (U) Service intelligence agencies and organizations.

(2) (U) Commander’s intelligence organizations and assets.

(3) (U) Others.

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

175

CLASSIFICATION

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT

Name

Rank and Service

Title

ATTACHMENTS:

A–Priority Intelligence Requirements

B–Others as needed

OFFICIAL:

s/ Name

Rank and Service

Title

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

176

Sample Format of Attachment A (Priority Intelligence

Requirements) to Exhibit 2 to Tab A to Appendix 6 to Annex

CLASSIFICATION

Copy no. of

copies

OFFICIAL DESIGNATION OF COMMAND

PLACE OF ISSUE

Date-time group

Message reference number

ATTACHMENT A TO EXHIBIT 2 TO TAB A TO APPENDIX 6 TO ANNEX I TO

OPERATION ORDER OR PLAN (Number) (Operation CODE WORD) (U)

PRIORITY INTELLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS (U)

1. (U) General. Identify requirements, including those of subordinate commanders, for priority

intelligence requirements for pre-execution and execution phases of the planned deception

operation.

2. (U) Before Implementation of the Order or Plan. List questions for which answers are needed

for further planning and as a basis for decision on plan implementation.

3. (U) Upon Implementation of the Order or Plan. List the additional priority intelligence

requirements and other intelligence requirements that become relevant upon decision to implement

the operation plan. (Use additional paragraphs if necessary to reflect differing requirements during

planned phases of the operation.)

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT

Name

Rank and Service

Title

OFFICIAL:

s/ Name

Rank and Service

Title

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

177

Sample Format of

Annex J (Command

elationships

)

Command relationships are the interrelated responsibilities between commanders and the authority

of commanders in the chain of command. Unity of effort is, in large part, achieved through the

application of a flexible range of command relationships. The joint force commander exercises

command during joint operations according to the provisions of JP 1, Doctrine for the Armed

Forces of the United States; JP 3-0, Joint Operations; MCDP 1-0; and MCWP 7-10, Marine Corps

Componency. These publications describe possible command relationships between the joint force

commander, the Marine Corps component commander, the MAGTF commander, and subordinate

commanders of assigned or attached Marine forces. This annex discusses—

 Requirements to coordinate support between forces in the same or adjacent areas according

to JP 1 and the common HHQ OPORD or OPLAN.

 Planning for succession of command and change of command location (alternate command

and control procedures). Refer to Paragraph 5 (Command and Signal) of the OPORD or

OPLAN or Annex K (Combat Information Systems).

 Department of Defense Directive 3025.14, Evacuation of U.S. Citizens and Designated

Aliens from Threatened Areas Abroad, delineates the responsibilities for protection of US

citizens abroad. In support of this directive, give special attention to cooperation and

coordination between US diplomatic and military activities during periods of tension and

hostilities.

 Relationships between the US Information Agency and the US Armed Forces in the conduct

of military information support operations.

MCWP 5-10

178

CLASSIFICATION

Copy no. of

copies

OFFICIAL DESIGNATION OF COMMAND

PLACE OF ISSUE

Date-time group

Message reference number

ANNEX J TO OPERATION ORDER OR PLAN (Number) (Operation CODE WORD) (U)

COMMAND RELATIONSHIPS (U)

(U) REFERENCES: List documents that provide necessary guidance on the command

relationships of forces concerned.

1. (U) General

a. (U) Purpose. To establish the relationships between—

(1) (U) Combatant commands

(2) (U) International commands and organizations.

(3) (U) Commander, US forces country

(4) (U) Service and functional component commanders

(5) (U) Major subordinate commanders

(6) (U) Coordinating authorities

(7) (U) Other subordinate military activities

(8) (U) US diplomatic missions

(9) (U) Government departments or agencies that support the operations

(10) (U) Forces and agencies of other nations

b. (U) Scope. Specify the scope and applicability of the command relationships established in

this annex for specific military operations or functions within an assigned geographic area; or

for specific military operations or functions not limited to a geographic area and the times or

circumstances when the relationships become effective.

2. (U) Command Lines

a. (U) Service and Functional Components. Indicate the command lines to Service and

functional components of the force and to subordinate elements, as appropriate.

b. (U) Other Subordinate Commands. Indicate the established command lines to subordinate

commanders for conducting this operation and the conditions under which forces will be

transferred to their operational control.

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

179

CLASSIFICATION

c. (U) Augmentation Forces. Indicate the purpose, time, and approximate duration of the

attachment and the degree of authority over and responsibility for the augmentation forces.

d. (U) Alternate Procedures. Discuss procedures for succession of command and change of

command location (alternate command and control procedures).

3. (U) Support and Coordination Relationships

a. (U) Supporting Military Forces. Indicate established relationships with military

organizations operating in support of the originating command.

b. (U) Coordinating Authorities. As necessary, assign a commander or another person the

responsibility for coordinating specific functions or activities.

c. (U) Supporting Agencies. Indicate the relationships between the elements of the force and

any supporting agencies, such as United States Information Agency. Refer to other annexes or

appendices, as appropriate.

d. (U) Inter-Service Support Arrangements. Refer to Annex D (Logistics/Combat Service

Support), subparagraph 2b(7), Inter-Service Logistic Support.

e. (U) Coordination with Diplomatic Agencies. Indicate any requirement for coordination

with chiefs of US diplomatic missions that is not included elsewhere in the plan and note who

is responsible for such coordination.

4. (U) Relationships with International and Foreign Commands and Organizations. Indicate

established command arrangements or relations with international commands and organizations,

foreign military commands, or guerrilla organizations. Also indicate the conditions under which

such relations would become effective.

5. (U) Planning Relationships. Specify established relationships between military commands for

developing supporting plans. Include any requirements for coordination with other-nation

commands and nonmilitary agencies.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT

Name

Rank and Service

Title

APPENDIX:

1–Command Relationships Diagram

OFFICIAL:

s/ Name

Rank and Service

Title

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

180

SAMPLE FORMAT OF APPENDIX 1

(COMMAND RELATIONSHIPS DIAGRAM) TO ANNEX

CLASSIFICATION

Copy no. ____of____copies

OFFICIAL DESIGNATION OF COMMAND

PLACE OF ISSUE

Date-time group

Message reference number

APPENDIX 1 TO ANNEX J TO OPERATION ORDER OR PLAN (Number) (Operation

CODE WORD) (U)

COMMAND RELATIONSHIPS DIAGRAM (U)

This appendix graphically portrays the command relationships. Show all specific relationships,

such as operational control, tactical control, or administrative control.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT

Name

Rank and Service

Title

OFFICIAL:

s/ Name

Rank and Service

Title

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

181

SAMPLE FORMAT OF ANNEX T

(

NETWORK ENGAGEMENT

)

The purpose of Annex T (Network Engagement) is to provide detailed information on the

interactions with friendly, neutral, and threat networks that will facilitate guidance to help achieve

the commander’s objectives within an operational area. These networks consist of people, places,

and things. There can be multiple friendly, neutral, and threat networks in the battlespace. Annex

T assist the commander and staff with gaining an understanding of the operational environment.

Intelligence is a critical component to build the necessary products that will facilitate

understanding. The products of network engagement support targeting and engagement. The

network engagement annex provides information that facilitates generating lethal and nonlethal

effects against threat networks. It also organizes information to facilitate generating nonlethal

effects exclusively with friendly and neutral networks, through partnership, cooperation, and

engagement.

CLASSIFICATION

Copy no.___of

___

copies

OFFICIAL DESIGNATION OF COMMAND

PLACE OF ISSUE

Date-time group

Message reference number

ANNEX T TO OPERATION ORDER OR PLAN (Number) (Operation CODE WORD) (U)

NETWORK ENGAGEMENT (U)

(U) REFERENCES:

(a)Diagrams, matrices and charts required for an understanding of this annex.

(b)Documents providing intelligence required for planning. Including related annexes, such as

Annex B (Intelligence).

(d)Appropriate standing operating procedures and other documents providing guidance on

network engagement.

(e)The originator of the annex should ensure that the units receiving or executing the plan or

order have the cited references.

1. (U) Situation

a. (U) Friendly. Summarize and categorize the friendly networks in the battlespace (i.e., allied

military forces, host nation government, international organizations, etc).

b.(U) Neutral. Summarize and categorize the neutral networks in the battlespace. (i.e., Local

tribes, labor unions, international organizations, etc).

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

182

CLASSIFICATION

c.( U ) Threat. Summarize and categorize the threat networks in the battlespace. (i.e., Nation

state military force, non-state actors, criminal, terrorist, etc).

2. (U) Mission. Provide the command’s mission from the basic OPORD.

3. (U) Execution

a. (U) Concept of Support. Summarize how the commander visualizes the integration of

network engagement into the operation.

b. (U) Network Engagement Products. Provide appropriate guidance for network engagement

products across the multiple friendly, neutral, and threat networks.

(1) (U) Critical variables. Identify the key resources or conditions within the operational

environment that must be shaped or maintained to attain the commander’s desired end

state.

(2) (U) Relevant Networks. Identify the relevant networks within the operational

environment that must be considered for planning, targeting and engagement to support the

attainment of the commander’s desired end state. These networks should associate in some

manner to the critical variables identified to meet the commander’s intent.

(3) (U) Association matrix. Identify the existence of relationships between nodes in each

friendly, neutral, and threat network, as determined by direct contact, that are relevant to

the operation. The nodes for each relevant network identified should be included in this

product to capture key information.

(4) (U) Activities matrix. Determine the connections between a key actor and

organizations, events, locations, or activities for each friendly, neutral, and threat network

that are relevant to the operation. The nodes for each relevant network identified should

be included in this product to capture key information.

(5) (U) Network diagram. Graphically display the connections between individuals,

organizations, and activities for each friendly, neutral, and threat network that are relevant

to the operation.

(6) (U) Social network analysis. Provide quantitative data regarding the degree of links

between nodes using mathematical computations to determine the relevancy of nodes

within a network that are relevant to the operation.

(7) (U) Network function templates. Organize known information about the relevant

networks to graphically depict the association of the network’s structure to its

functions.Templates assist in visualizing how networks function and may be used to

facilitate critical factors analysis.

(8) (U) Critical factors analysis. Apply critical factors analysis to each relevant network to

identify the critical factors needed for planning and targeting. The critical factors to be

identified are the network’s critical variables, conditions in the operational environment

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

183

CLASSIFICATION

that may affect the formation and sustainment of friendly, neutral, or threat networks that

are relevant to the operation, critical capabilities, critical requirements, and critical

vulnerabilities.

c. (U) Targeting and Engagement. Summarize network engagement support to targeting and

engagement. Refer to Annex B (Intelligence) and Annex C (Operations).

d. (U) Operation Assessment. Summarize network engagement support to the operation

assessment plan. Refer to Appendix 22 (Operation Assessment Plan) to Annex C (Operations).

4. (U) Administration and Logistics. Address any network engagement administrative or logistic

requirements.

5. (U) Command and Signal. List any network engagement command and control instructions. State

the command structure to support network engagement. Identify any special network engagement

communications, software, or reporting requirements.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT

Name

Rank and Service

Title

Appendices:

1–Critical Variables

2–Relevant Networks

3–Association Matrices

4–Activities Matrices

5–Network Diagrams

6–Social Network Analysis

7–Network Function Templates

8–Critical Factors Analysis

OFFICIAL:

Name

Rank and Service

Title

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

184

SAMPLE FORMAT OF ANNEX V

(INTERAGENCY/INTERORGANIZATIONAL COORDINATION

)

CLASSIFICATION

Copy no. of

copies

OFFICIAL DESIGNATION OF COMMAND

PLACE OF ISSUE

Date-time group

Message reference number

ANNEX V TO OPERATION ORDER OR PLAN (Number) (Operation CODE WORD) (U)

INTERAGENCY-INTERORGANIZATIONAL COORDINATION (U)

(U) REFERENCES: List documents that provide necessary guidance to this annex.

1. (U) Situation

a. (U) General

(1) (U) Statement. This annex provides military and interagency planners with a brief

synopsis of the major elements of this plan and the necessary coordination and interaction

between the command and the interagency while preparing for and during the plan’s

execution. It is based on planning factors and estimates available at the time of preparation

and is subject to modification based on the actual conditions or situation existing at the

time of execution.

(2) (U) Politico-Military Situation. Summarize the politico-military situation that would

establish the preconditions under which this plan might be executed. At a minimum,

identify the US national security objectives and interests served by this plan and the

interagency capabilities needed to return to normalcy or to establish a new normalcy.

(3) (U) Policy Coordination. Identify what coordination and support requirements might

be necessary to initiate interagency planning.

(4) (U) Planning and Execution Coordination. Describe the proposed concept for

interagency coordination during both planning and execution to ensure unity of effort and

appropriate deconfliction. Outline how the process supports the operation.

b. (U) Assumptions. List key assumptions that might impact or influence interagency

planning.

c. (U) Legal Considerations. List any legal considerations that may affect interagency

participation.

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

185

CLASSIFICATION

2. (U) Mission. Provide the command’s mission from the base order.

3. (U) Execution.

a. (U) Concept of Operations. Outline the primary objectives and desired effects of each

phase. Describe the concept for interagency coordination and how it supports the concept of

military operations. Outline the commander’s interorganizational cooperaton for each phase

and what resources, capabilities, and liaison from other US Government agencies can support

each of these objectives. Comment on the desirability and feasibility of government, non-

governmental, and private organization participation in the operation. Identify the resources or

capabilities from the each agency that will support each of these objectives and comment on

the desirability and level of nongovernmental participation in the operation.

(1) (U) Commander’s Intent. Describe the commander’s intent and optimal level of

involvement by other US Government agencies for each phase. Be sure to identify the

desired end state for each phase and list the anticipated desired actions of the major US

Government agencies to support these end states.

(2) (U) Major Areas of US Government Response. Define the areas of requested action and

responsibility from US Government agencies and non-governmental organizations based

on the concept of operations.

(3) (U) Level of Integration. Describe the level of integration envisioned between the

military, US Government agencies, and non-governmental organizations as operations

transition between phases.

b. (U) Tasks and Milestones. Identify the foreseen tasks and required milestones necessary

before handing off responsibilities to civilian authorities.

c. (U) Coordinating Instructions. Include general instructions applicable to other US

Government agencies and nongovernmental organizations.

4. (U) Administration and Logistics. Provide concept for furnishing administrative and logistic

support to US Government agencies and international organizations/nongovernmental

organizations participating in the operation. Include the following:

a. (U) Personnel and personal property accounting.

b. (U) Availability of security and force protection.

c. (U) Availability of medical care.

d. (U) Availability of transportation assets in theater and in the host nation.

e. (U) Availability of all classes of supply.

f. (U) Availability of maintenance support for vehicles, administrative, and support

equipment.

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

MCWP 5-10

186

CLASSIFICATION

g. (U) Use of office administrative equipment and personnel

h. (U) Availability and use of communications assets

5. (U) Command and Control. Identify any unique command relationships established for the

purposes of interagency coordination, such as a joint interagency coordination group or

interagency coordination directorate. Describe the proposed organizational relationship and chain

of responsibility between the commander and other US Government agencies and international

organizations.

a. (U) US Government. Identify the chain of authority for US Government agencies.

b. (U) International Organizations. Identify the expected chain of authority for

intergovernmental organizations should they become involved.

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT

Name

Rank and Service

Title

APPENDICES:

As required. Could include detailed information on key interagency, international organization

and nongovernmental organization stakeholders, such as mission, current and planned programs,

locations, point of contact information, or assessments.

OFFICIAL:

s/ Name

Rank and Service

Title

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

Marine Corps Planning Process

187

SAMPLE FORMAT OF ANNEX X (EXECUTION

HECKLIST

)

Annex X (Execution Checklist) provides a convenient and useful listing of key events and tasks

that must be conducted by the force to accomplish the mission. The synchronization matrix is the

key MCPP tool used to create the execution checklist. The execution checklist allows subordinate

commands and supporting and adjacent forces to coordinate their actions and maintain situational

awareness. The execution checklist also serves as an excellent command and control and

information management tool for the combat operations center. Critical events and tasks are

included in the execution checklist. Events and tasks should be listed in the order of envisioned

execution.

MCWP 5-10

188

CLASSIFICATION

Copy no. of copies

OFFICIAL DESIGNATION OF COMMAND

PLACE OF ISSUE

Date-time group

Message reference number

ANNEX X TO OPERATION ORDER OR PLAN (Number) (Operation CODE WORD) (U)

EXECUTION CHECKLIST (U)(U) Generally displayed as a spreadsheet, with the applicable

following items listed in order of expected execution:

 Line number

 Unit

 Task

 Condition

 Location

 Communications nets

 Brevity code

 Planned date/time

 Blank space for recording actual date/time the task is initiated or completed

 Blank space for recording notes

ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT

Name

Rank and Service

Title

OFFICIAL:

s/ Name

Rank and Service

Title

Page number

CLASSIFICATION

LOSSARY

SECTION I. ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ACE............................................................................................................ aviation combat element

APEX ........................................................................................... Adaptive Planning and Execution

ARG ............................................................................................................ amphibious ready group

ASCOPE ...................................... areas, structures, capabilities, organizations, people, and events

CAP ................................................................................................................. crisis action planning

CAT........................................................................................................................crisis action team

CCIR ....................................................................... commander’s critical information requirement

CJCSM ...................................................................... Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff manual

COA ......................................................................................................................... course of action

COG ........................................................................................................................ center of gravity

COMMSTRAT ...................................................................communication strategy and operations

CONOPS ......................................................................................................... concept of operations

CSNE ............................................................................ commander’s significant notification event

CSS .............................................................................................................. combat service support

DOD ............................................................................................................. Department of Defense

DSM ............................................................................................................. decision support matrix

DST .......................................................................................................... decision support template

EPW .............................................................................................................. enemy prisoner of war

FFIR .................................................................................... friendly force information requirement

FRAGO .................................................................................................................fragmentary order

G-1 ...................................................... assistant chief of staff for personnel/personnel staff section

G-2 ................................................ assistant chief of staff for intelligence/intelligence staff section

G-3 ............ assistant chief of staff for operations and training/operations and training staff section

G-4 ........................................................... assistant chief of staff for logistics/logistics staff section

G-5 .................................................................... assistant chief of staff for plans/plans staff section

G-6 .................... assistant chief of staff for communications/communications system staff section

HHQ ................................................................................................................... higher headquarters

HPT .......................................................................................................................high-payoff target

HVT ....................................................................................................................... high-value target

IPB .................................................................................. intelligence preparation of the battlespace

MCWP 5-10

190

ISR ............................................................................intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance

JP ............................................................................................................................. joint publication

LOO ........................................................................................................................ line of operation

MAGTF............................................................................................... Marine air-ground task force

MCDP ....................................................................................... Marine Corps doctrinal publication

MCPP .............................................................................................. Marine Corps planning process

MCRP .......................................................................................Marine Corps reference publication

MCTP ........................................................................................... Marine Corps tactical publication

MCWP .................................................................................. Marine Corps warfighting publication

MEB ................................................................................................... Marine expeditionary brigade

MEF ....................................................................................................... Marine expeditionary force

METT-T ........... mission, enemy, terrain and weather, troops and support available-time available

MEU ......................................................................................................... Marine expeditionary unit

MSE ........................................................................................................ major subordinate element

MSEL ........................................................................................................ master scenario event list

N-2 .................................................................................. Navy component intelligence staff officer

NAI ................................................................................................................ named area of interest

NGO .................................................................................................. nongovernmental organization

OPLAN .......................................................................................................................operation plan

OPORD ..................................................................................................................... operation order

OPT .......................................................................................................... operational planning team

PIR .................................................................................................priority intelligence requirement

PMESII .................................. political, military, economic, social, information, and infrastructure

R&S................................................................................................ reconnaissance and surveillance

R2P2 ............................................................................................... rapid response planning process

RCPA .......................................................................................... relative combat power assessment

RFI ............................................................................................................... request for information

S-2 ......................................................................................... intelligence officer/intelligence office

S-3 ..................................................... operations and training officer/operations and training office

S-4 .................................................................................................... logistics officer/logistics office

SME ................................................................................................................. subject matter expert

SOP ..................................................................................................... standing operating procedure

TAI ................................................................................................................... target area of interest

Marine Corps Planning Process

191

TRAP ............................................................................. tactical recovery of aircraft and personnel

US ................................................................................................................................ United States

WARNORD ................................................................................................................ warning order

MCWP 5-10

192

SECTION II. TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

acceptability—The plan review criterion for assessing whether a contemplated course of action is

proportional, worth the cost, consistent with the law of war; and is militarily and politically

supportable. See also feasibility. (DOD Dictionary)

adversary—A party acknowledged as potentially hostile to a friendly party and against which the

use of force may be envisaged. (DOD Dictionary)

adversary template—(See DOD Dictionary for core definition. Marine Corps amplification

follows.) A model that portrays the adversary’s frontage depths, echelon spacing, and force

composition as well as the disposition of adversary combat, combat support, and combat service

support units for a given operation. It portrays how the adversary would like to fight if

unconstrained by the operational environment. (MCRP 1-10.2)

area of influence—A geographical area wherein a commander is directly capable of influencing

operations by maneuver or fire support systems normally under the commander’s command or

control. (DOD Dictionary)

area of interest—That area of concern to the commander, including the area of influence, areas

adjacent thereto, and extending into enemy territory. Also called AOI. See also area of influence.

(DOD Dictionary)

area of operations—An operational area defined by a commander for land and maritime forces

that should be large enough to accomplish their missions and protect their forces. Also called AO.

See also area of responsibility. (DOD Dictionary)

area of responsibility—The geographical area associated with a combatant command within

which a geographic combatant commander has authority to plan and conduct operations. Also

called AOR.

assumption—A specific supposition of the operational environment that is assumed to be true, in

the absence of positive proof, essential for the continuation of planning. (DOD Dictionary)

avenue of approach—An air or ground route of an attacking force of a given size leading to its

objective or to key terrain in its path. Also called AA. (DOD Dictionary)

battlespace—The environment, factors, and conditions that must be understood to successfully

apply combat power, protect the force, or complete the mission. This includes the air, land, sea,

space, and the included enemy and friendly forces; facilities; weather; terrain; the electromagnetic

spectrum; and the information environment within the operational areas, areas of interest, and areas

of influence. (MCRP 1-10.2)

branch—The contingency options built into the base plan used for changing the mission,

orientation, or direction of movement of a force to aid success of the operation based on anticipated

events, opportunities, or disruptions caused by enemy actions and reactions. See also sequel.

(DOD Dictionary. Part 4 of a 4-part definition.)

Marine Corps Planning Process

193

campaign—A series of related operations aimed at achieving strategic and operational objectives

within a given time and space. (DOD Dictionary)

center of gravity—(See DOD Dictionary for core definition. Marine Corps amplification

follows.) A key source of strength without which an enemy cannot function. Also called COG.

(MCRP 1-10.2)

collection plan—A systematic scheme to optimize the employment of all available collection

capabilities and associated processing, exploitation, and dissemination resources to satisfy specific

information requirements. (DOD Dictionary)

commander’s critical information requirement— (See DOD Dictionary for core definition.

Marine Corps amplification follows.) Information regarding the enemy and friendly activities and

the environment identified by the commander as critical to maintaining situational awareness,

planning future activities, and facilitating timely decision making. The two subcategories are

priority intelligence requirements and friendly force information requirements. Also called CCIR.

(MCRP 1-10.2)

commander’s intent—(See DOD Dictionary for core definition. Marine Corps amplification

follows.) A commander’s clear, concise articulation of the purpose(s) behind one or more tasks

assigned to a subordinate. It is one of two parts of every mission statement that guides the exercise

of initiative in the absence of instructions. (MCRP 1-10.2)

concept of operations—A verbal or graphic statement that clearly and concisely expresses what

the commander intends to accomplish and how it will be done using available resources. Also

called CONOPS. (DOD Dictionary)

constraint—(See DOD Dictionary for core definition. Marine Corps amplification follows.)

Something that must be done that limits freedom of action. Constraints are included in the rules of

engagement, commander’s guidance, or instructions from higher headquarters. See also restraint.

(MCRP 1-10.2)

contingency—A situation requiring military operations in response to natural disasters, terrorists,

subversives, or as otherwise directed by appropriate authority to protect United States interests.

(DOD Dictionary).

critical thinking—Purposeful and reflective judgment about what to believe or what to do in

response to observations, experience, verbal or written expressions, or arguments. (MCRP 1-10.2.)

critical vulnerability—(See DOD Dictionary for core definition. Marine Corps amplification

follows.) An aspect of a center of gravity that, if exploited, will do the most significant damage to

an enemy’s and/or adversary’s ability to resist. A vulnerability cannot be critical unless it

undermines a key strength. Also called CV. (MCRP 1-10.2)

D-day—The unnamed day on which a particular operation commences or is to commence. (DOD

Dictionary)

MCWP 5-10

194

decision point—(See DOD Dictionary for core definition. Marine Corps amplification follows.)

An event, area, or point in the battlespace where and when the friendly commander will make a

critical decision. (MCRP 1-10.2)

decisive action—Any action the commander deems fundamental to achieving mission success.

See also shaping action; sustaining action. (Note: Decisive actions are part of a purpose-based

battlespace framework.) (MCRP 1-10.2)

decision support template—(See DOD Dictionary for core definition. Marine Corps

amplification follows.) A staff product initially used in the wargaming process that graphically

represents the decision points and projected situations and indicates when, where, and under what

conditions a decision is most likely to be required to initiate a specific activity (such as a branch

or sequel) or event (such as lifting or shifting of fires). Also called DST. (MCRP 1-10.2)

design—The conception and articulation of a framework for solving a problem. (MCRP 1-10.2)

end state—The set of required conditions that defines achievement of the commander’s

objectives. (DOD Dictionary)

event template— (See DOD Dictionary for core definition. Marine Corps amplification follows.)

A model against which enemy activity can be recorded and compared. It represents a sequential

projection of events that relate to space and time on the battlefield and indicate the enemy’s ability

to adopt a particular course of action. It is a guide for collection and reconnaissance and

surveillance planning. (MCRP 1-10.2)

feasibility—The plan review criterion for assessing whether the assigned mission can be

accomplished using available resources within the time contemplated by the plan. See also

acceptability. (DOD Dictionary)

fragmentary order— (See DOD Dictionary for core definition. Marine Corps amplification

follows.) An abbreviated form of an operation order, usually issued on a day-to-day basis, that

eliminates the need for restating information contained in a basic operation order. It may be issued

in sections. Also called FRAGO. (MCRP 1-10.2)

friendly force information requirement—(See DOD Dictionary for core definition. Marine

Corps amplification follows.) Information the commander needs about friendly forces in order to

develop plans and make effective decisions. Depending upon the circumstances, information on

unit location, composition, readiness, personnel status, and logistics status could become a friendly

force information requirement. Also called FFIR. (MCRP 1-10.2)

H-hour— 1. The specific hour on D-day at which a particular operation commences. 2. In

amphibious operations, the time the first landing craft or amphibious vehicle of the waterborne

wave lands or is scheduled to land on the beach and, in some cases, the commencement of

countermine breaching operations. (DOD Dictionary)

high-payoff target—A target whose loss to the enemy will significantly contribute to the success

of the friendly course of action. Also called HPT. See also high-value target; target. (DOD

Dictionary)

Marine Corps Planning Process

195

high-value target—A target the enemy commander requires for the successful completion of the

mission. Also called HVT. See also high-payoff target; target. (DOD Dictionary)

information environment—The aggregate of individuals, organizations, and systems that collect,

process, disseminate, or act on information. (DOD Dictionary)

information requirements—(See DOD Dictionary for core definition. Marine Corps

amplification follows.) All information elements the commander and staff require to successfully

conduct operations, that is, all elements necessary to address the factors of mission, enemy, terrain

and weather, troops and support available—time available.Also called IRs. (MCRP 1-10.2)

intelligence preparation of the battlespace—(See DOD Dictionary for core definition. Marine

Corps amplification follows.) The systematic, continuous process of analyzing the threat and

environment in a specific geographic area. Also called IPB. (MCRP1-10.2)

joint planning process—An orderly, analytical process that consists of a logical set of steps to

analyze a mission, select the best course of action, and produce a campaign or joint operation plan

or order. Also called JPP. (DOD Dictionary)

line of operation—A line that defines the interior or exterior orientation of the force in relation to

the enemy or that connects actions on nodes and/or decisive points related in time and space to an

objective(s). Also called LOO. (DOD Dictionary)

main effort—The designated subordinate unit whose mission at a given point in time is most

critical to overall mission success. It is usually weighted with the preponderance of combat power

and is directed against a center of gravity through a critical vulnerability. (MCRP 1-10.2)

Marine Corps Planning Process—A six-step methodology that helps organize the thought

processes of the commander and staff throughout the planning and execution of military

operations. It focuses on the mission and the threat and is based on the Marine Corps philosophy

of maneuver warfare. It capitalizes on the principle of unity of command and supports the

establishment and maintenance of tempo. The six steps consist of problem framing, course of

action development, course of action war game, course of action comparison and decision, orders

development, and transition. Also called MCPP. (Note: Tenets of the MCPP include top-down

planning, single-battle concept, and integrated planning.) (MCRP 1-10.2).

mission—The task, together with the purpose, that clearly indicates the action to be taken and the

reason therefore. (DOD Dictionary)

mission, enemy, terrain and weather, troops and support available–time available—1. In the

context of information management, the major subject categories into which relevant information

is grouped for military operations. 2. In the context of tactics, the major factors considered during

mission analysis. Also called METT-T. (MCRP 1-10.2)

named area of interest—(See DOD Dictionary for core definition. Marine Corps amplification

follows.) A point or area along a particular avenue of approach through which enemy activity is

expected to occur. Activity or lack of activity within a named area of interest will help to confirm

or deny a particular enemy course of action. Also called NAI. (MCRP 1-10.2)

MCWP 5-10

196

operational approach—A broad description of the mission, operational concepts, tasks, and

actions required to accomplish the mission. (DOD Dictionary)

operational planning team—A group built around the future operations section that integrates

the staff representatives and resources. The operational planning team may have representatives

or augmentation from each of the standard staff sections, the seven warfighting functions, staff

liaisons, and/or subject matter experts. Also called OPT. (Upon promulgation of this publication,

the modified definition is approved for use and will be included in the next edition of MCRP 1-

10.2.)

operation assessment—1. A continuous process that measures the overall effectiveness of

employing capabilities during military operations in achieving stated objectives. 2. Determination

of the progress toward accomplishing a task, creating a condition, or achieving an objective. (DOD

Dictionary)

operation order—A directive issued by a commander to subordinate commanders for the purpose

of effecting the coordinated execution of an operation. Also called OPORD. (DOD Dictionary)

operation plan—A complete and detailed plan containing a full description of the concept of

operations, all annexes applicable to the plan, and a time-phased force and deployment data. Also

called OPLAN. See also operation order. (DOD Dictionary)

planning order—A planning directive that provides essential planning guidance and directs the

development, adaptation, or refinement of a plan/order. Also called PLANORD. (DOD

Dictionary)

priority intelligence requirement—(See DOD Dictionary for core definition. Marine Corps

amplification follows.) An intelligence requirement associated with a decision that will critically

affect the overall success of the command’s mission. Also called PIR. (MCRP 1-10.2)

rapid response planning process—A time-constrained version of the full, six-step Marine Corps

Planning Process developed to enable the Marine expeditionary unit to plan and begin execution

of certain tasks within a 6-hour time period. Also called R2P2. (MCRP 1-10.2)

rear area—That area extending forward from a command’s rear boundary to the rear of the area

assigned to the command’s subordinate units. This area is provided primarily for the performance

of combat service support functions. (MCRP 1-10.2)

restraint—(See DOD Dictionary for core definition. Marine Corps amplification follows.) 1.

Something that a commander is prohibited from doing that may limit freedom of action. 2.

Something that a commander prohibits subordinates from doing. See also constraint. (Note:

Restraints are included in the rules of engagement, commander’s guidance, or instructions from

higher headquarters.) (MCRP 1-10.2)

risk—1. Probability and severity of loss linked to hazards. 2. The chance of hazard or bad

consequences resulting in exposure to possible injury or loss. Risk level is expressed in terms of

hazard probability or severity. (Upon promulgation of this publication, the modified definition is

approved for use and will be included in the next edition of MCRP 1-10.2.)

Marine Corps Planning Process

197

sequel—The subsequent operation or phase based on the possible outcomes of the current

operation or phase. See also branch. (DOD Dictionary)

shaping actions—The lethal and nonlethal activities conducted throughout the battlespace to

attack an enemy capability or force or to influence the enemy commander’s decision-making. See

also decisive action; sustaining actions. (Note: Shaping actions are part of a purpose-based

battlespace framework.) (MCRP 1-10.2)

situational awareness—Knowledge and understanding of the current situation that promotes

timely, relevant, and accurate assessment of friendly, enemy, and other operations within the

battlespace in order to facilitate decision-making. An informational perspective and skill that foster

an ability to determine quickly the context and relevance of events that are unfolding. Also called

SA. (MCRP 1-10.2)

situational understanding—The product of applying analysis and synthesis to relevant

information to determine the relationship among the mission, enemy, terrain and weather, troops

and support—time available variables to facilitate decision-making. (MCRP 1-10.2)

situation template— (See DOD Dictionary for core definition. Marine Corps amplification

follows.) A series of projections that portray, based on enemy doctrine, the most probable

disposition and location of enemy forces within constraints imposed by weather and terrain.

(MCRP 1-10.2)

spot report—A concise narrative report of essential information covering events or conditions

that may have an immediate and significant effect on current planning and operations that is

afforded the most expeditious means of transmission consistent with requisite security. Also called

SPOTREP. (Note: In reconnaissance and surveillance usage, spot report is not to be used.) (DOD

Dictionary)

staff estimate—A continual evaluation of how factors in a staff section’s functional area support

and impact the planning and execution of the mission. (DOD Dictionary)

supporting effort—Designated subordinate unit(s) whose mission is designed to directly

contribute to the su ccess of the main effort. (MCRP 1-10.2)

supporting plan—An operation plan prepared by a supporting commander, a subordinate

commander, or an agency to satisfy the requests or requirements of the supported commander’s

plan. (DOD Dictionary)

sustaining actions—Activities conducted to prepare and support friendly forces (e.g., planning,

logistics, force protection) that promote unity of effort and extend operational reach. See also

decisive action; shaping actions. (Note: Sustaining actions are part of a purpose-based

battlespace framework.) (MCRP 1-10.2)

synchronization matrix—A format for the staff to record the results of wargaming and

synchronize the course of action across time, space, and purpose in relation to an enemy’s and/or

adversary’s course of action. (Upon promulgation of this publication, the modified definition is

approved for use and will be included in the next edition of MCRP 1-10.2)

MCWP 5-10

198

target—An entity or object that performs a function for the threat considered for possible

engagement or other action. (DOD Dictionary)

target area of interest— The geographical area where high-value targets can be acquired and

engaged by friendly forces. Also called TAI. See also area of interest; high-value target; target.

(DOD Dictionary)

targeting—The process of selecting and prioritizing targets and matching the appropriate response

to them, considering operational requirements and capabilities. See also target. (DOD Dictionary)

wargaming—A step-by-step process of action, reaction, and counteraction for visualizing the

execution of each friendly course of action in relation to enemy/adversary courses of action and

reactions. It explores the possible branches and sequels to the primary plan resulting in a final plan

and decision points for critical actions. (MCRP 1-10.2)

warning order—1. A preliminary notice of an order or action that is to follow. 2. A planning

directive that initiates the development and evaluation of military courses of action by a

commander. Also called WARNORD. (DOD Dictionary)

REFERENCES AND RELATED PUBLICATIONS

Department of Defense Issuances

Department of Defense Directive (DODD)

3025.14 Evacuation of U.S. Citizens and Designated Aliens from Threatened Areas Abroad

Department of Defense Instruction (DODI)

1100.22 Policy and Procedures for Determining Workforce Mix

Department of Defense Manual (DODM)

5200.01, Vol. 1 DoD Information Security Program: Overview, Classification, and

Declassification

Military Standard (MIL-STD)

2525D Department of Defense Interface Standard: Joint Military Symbology

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Manual (CJCSM)

3130.03 Planning and Execution Formats and Guidance

Joint Issuances

Joint Publications (JPs)

1 Doctrine for the Armed Forces of the United States

3-0 Joint Operations

3-07 Stability

3-08 Interorganizational Cooperation

3-13.4 Military Deception

3-20 Security Cooperation

3-25 Countering Threat Networks

3-33 Joint Task Force Headquarters

4-01 The Defense Transportation System

5-0 Joint Planning

Miscellaneous

DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms

Joint Doctrine Note 1-16, Command Red Team

North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Standardization Agreement (STANAG)

2014 NATO Formats for Orders and Designation of Timing, Locations, and Boundaries

United States Army

MCWP 5-10

200

Field Manual (FM)

7-100.1 Opposing Force Operations

Training Circular (TC)

7-100.2 Opposing Force Tactics

United States Marine Corps

Marine Corps Doctrinal Publications (MCDPs)

1 Warfighting

1-0 Marine Corps Operations w/Changes 1, 2, and 3

4 Logistics

5 Planning

Marine Corps Warfighting Publications (MCWPs)

3-03 Stability Operations

3-32 Marine Air-Ground Task Force Information Operations

7-10 Marine Corps Componency

Marine Corps Tactical Publications (MCTPs)

3-02A MAGTF Network Engagement Activities

3-40.B Tactical-Level Logistics

Marine Corps Reference Publications (MCRPs)

1-10.2 Marine Corps Supplement to the DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms

2-10B.1 Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield/Battlespace

5-10.1 Multi-Service Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures for Operation Assessment

Marine Corps Order (MCO)

3500.27C Risk Management

Miscellaneous Marine Corps Publications

MAGTF Staff Training Program (MSTP) Pamphlets

2-0.1 Red Cell – Green Cell

2-0.2 Intelligence Planner’s Guide

5-0.2 Operational Planning Team Leaders Guide

Marine Corps Intelligence Activity (MCIA) 1540-002-95, Generic Intelligence Requirements

Handbook (GIRH)

Miscellaneous

Operation Plan/Operation Order Format