ARMY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FOR HOMELAND SECURITY

REPORT 2

C4ISR

Committee on Army Science and Technology for Homeland Defense—C4ISR

Board on Army Science and Technology

Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C. www.nap.edu



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR ARMY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FOR HOMELAND SECURITY REPORT 2 C4ISR Committee on Army Science and Technology for Homeland Defense—C4ISR Board on Army Science and Technology Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS Washington, D.C. www.nap.edu

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was supported by Contract No. DAAD19-02-C-0049 between the National Academy of Sciences and the Department of the Army. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organization that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number 0-309-09164-0 (Book) International Standard Book Number 0-309-53071-7 (PDF) Cover: The Pentagon burning after being struck by a hijacked commercial airliner, September 11, 2001. Courtesy of Reza Marvashti, The Free Lance-Star, Fredericksburg, Virginia. Limited copies are available from: Board on Army Science and Technology National Research Council 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 (202) 334-3118 Additional copies are available from: The National Academies Press 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Lockbox 285 Washington, DC 20055 (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area) Internet, http://www.nap.edu Copyright 2004 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR This page intentionally left blank.

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR COMMITTEE ON ARMY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FOR HOMELAND DEFENSE—C4ISR JOHN W. LYONS, NAE, Chair, U.S. Army Research Laboratory (retired), Mount Airy, Maryland DENNIS J. REIMER, Vice Chair, U.S. Army (retired) and Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism, Oklahoma City DUANE A. ADAMS, Carnegie Mellon University, Arlington, Virginia HENRY L. BERTONI, Polytechnic University, Brooklyn, New York JAMES J. CARAFANO, The Heritage Foundation, Washington, D.C. GEORGE M. CLARK, Radiance Technologies, Inc., Huntsville, Alabama TIMOTHY COFFEY, University of Maryland, College Park, and National Defense University, Washington, D.C. ANTHONY C. DIRIENZO, COLSA Corporation, Huntsville, Alabama MITRA DUTTA, University of Illinois, Chicago FREDERICK L. FROSTIC, Booz Allen Hamilton, McLean, Virginia C. WILLIAM GEAR, NAE, NEC Research Institute, Princeton, New Jersey JAMES R. KLUGH, U.S. Army (retired) and Dimensions International, Inc., Alexandria, Virginia JOSEPH P. MACKIN, E-OIR Measurements, Inc., Spotsylvania, Virginia LOUIS C. MARQUET, Consultant, Long Branch, New Jersey LOIS C. McCOY, National Institute for Urban Search and Rescue, Santa Barbara, California CHANDRA KUMAR N. PATEL, NAE, NAS, University of California at Los Angeles ALBERT A. SCIARRETTA, CNS Technologies, Inc., Springfield, Virginia ANNETTE L. SOBEL, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico MICHAEL F. SPIGELMIRE, U.S. Army (retired) and Consultant, Destin, Florida LEO YOUNG, NAE, Consultant, Baltimore, Maryland Liaisons, Board on Army Science and Technology ROBERT L. CATTOI, Rockwell International (retired), Dallas, Texas DONALD R. KEITH, U.S. Army (retired) and Cypress International (retired), Alexandria, Virginia National Research Council Staff MARGARET N. NOVACK, Study Director JAMES C. MYSKA, Research Associate CARTER W. FORD, Senior Project Assistant

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR BOARD ON ARMY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY JOHN E. MILLER, Chair, Oracle Corporation, Reston, Virginia GEORGE T. SINGLEY III, Vice Chair, Hicks and Associates, Inc., McLean, Virginia DAWN A. BONNELL, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia NORVAL L. BROOME, MITRE Corporation (retired), Suffolk, Virginia ROBERT L. CATTOI, Rockwell International (retired), Dallas, Texas DARRELL W. COLLIER, Consultant, Leander, Texas GILBERT F. DECKER, Walt Disney Imagineering (retired), Glendale, California ALAN H. EPSTEIN, NAE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge ROBERT R. EVERETT, NAE, MITRE Corporation (retired), New Seabury, Massachusetts PATRICK F. FLYNN, NAE, Cummins Engine Company, Inc. (retired), Columbus, Indiana WILLIAM R. GRAHAM, National Security Research, Inc., Arlington, Virginia HENRY J. HATCH, NAE, Army Chief of Engineers (retired) Oakton, Virginia EDWARD J. HAUG, University of Iowa, Iowa City MIRIAM E. JOHN, California Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore DONALD R. KEITH, Cypress International (retired), Alexandria, Virginia CLARENCE W. KITCHENS, Hicks and Associates, Inc., McLean, Virginia ROGER A. KRONE, Boeing Integrated Defense Systems, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania JOHN W. LYONS, NAE, U.S. Army Research Laboratory (retired), Mount Airy, Maryland JOHN H. MOXLEY, IOM, Korn/Ferry International, Los Angeles, California MALCOLM R. O’NEIL, Lockheed Martin Corporation, Bethesda, Maryland EDWARD K. REEDY, Georgia Institute of Technology Research Institute, Atlanta DENNIS J. REIMER, U.S. Army (retired) and Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism, Oklahoma City WALTER D. SINCOSKIE, Telcordia Technologies, Inc., Morristown, New Jersey WILLIAM R. SWARTOUT, Institute for Creative Technologies, University of Southern California, Marina del Rey EDWIN L. THOMAS, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge JOSEPH J. VERVIER, ENSCO, Inc., Melbourne, Florida National Research Council Staff BRUCE A. BRAUN, Director WILLIAM E. CAMPBELL, Administrative Officer CHRIS JONES, Financial Associate DEANNA P. SPARGER, Administrative Associate

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR Preface This is the second study in a series of three sponsored by the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research and Technology. It was conducted by the Committee on Army Science and Technology for Homeland Defense—C4ISR1 of the Board on Army Science and Technology in the Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences of the National Research Council. The statement of task for this second report is as follows: In this follow-on study, focusing on the C4ISR area and the first responder mission, the National Research Council will: examine stated capabilities needed for Homeland Security and the Army’s Objective Force,2 identifying and describing areas in which the two communities have similar technical needs and in which collaboration may be possible. highlight technology and systems solutions under development (in both S&T and Acquisition) for the Objective Force, both in the Department of Defense and commercially, which might meet the needs of the Department of Homeland Security. describe other issues that should be addressed in order to facilitate collaboration and sharing of research. 1   C4ISR is the acronym for command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance. 2   The Objective Force is now called the Future Force and is referred to as such throughout this report.

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR prepare a consensus report documenting the study results and containing findings and recommendations to assist the Army. FOUNDATION PROVIDED BY THE FIRST STUDY In September 2001, the U.S. Army asked the Board on Army Science and Technology (BAST) to investigate how science and technology might better enable the Army to accomplish its mission in the homeland. The initial BAST report (completed before the establishment of the new Department of Homeland Security) surveyed a broad range of relevant technologies, recommending that the Army take advantage of potential transferability between technologies for the Future Force and those for homeland security.3 In the C4ISR area, the committee noted that the Army will need the capability to establish links between its first responder military units and civilian first responders to emergency events. The committee also took the view that the Army should play a major role in providing emergency C4ISR in the event of a major natural or terrorism disaster in which civilian systems are seriously impaired. The committee further concluded that the architecture and technology needed for a C4ISR system for homeland security are compatible with the Army’s framework for developing and fielding the Future Force, although the Future Force system would have to be adapted or extended to meet the different mission and challenges of homeland security. The first report was written in a relatively short period of time. Because of the extensive scope of the review, the lack of a well-defined national operational framework,4 and the time-sensitive nature of the Army’s interest, the committee did not study specific products but rather considered technologies one level above individual products, processes, or services. COMMITTEE COMPOSITION AND PROCESS FOR THE CURRENT STUDY The second study began with a review of the membership of the first committee and the nomination to the second committee of members with the necessary expertise in C4ISR. The membership of the Committee on Army Science and Technology for Homeland Defense—C4ISR was chosen to include representation from three communities: the military sector, the emergency responder community, and the C4ISR scientific and technical world. The scientific and technological skill sets of the membership include communications, computer science, sensors and guidance, information science, systems engineering, model- 3   See National Research Council, Science and Technology for Army Homeland Security: Report 1, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 2003. 4   National operational framework refers to a plan that the Army would use to conduct whatever operation might be necessary in response to a terrorist attack.

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR ing and simulation, and systems analysis. Although there is no classified material in this report, a security clearance was considered essential, as many of the topics that would be of interest to the committee are classified. The committee spent considerable time deliberating on how to address the statement of task. It determined that the report should focus on the response phase of a catastrophic event rather than attempt to consider the prevention of such an event. This approach was justified because the response phase would be the time when most emergency responders would be engaged and when emergency C4ISR capabilities would be most called upon. The committee also chose not to address commercial items, for a variety of reasons. To begin with, the timing of the study as required by the contract was constrained. Additionally, the Army now uses commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) equipment whenever possible, and the committee believed that whatever COTS items might be of interest would already have been embedded in the Army Future Force technologies. Nevertheless, the committee admits that it may have missed some of the more innovative COTS technologies.5 Lastly, in order to do justice to a commercial equipment survey, the committee believed that it would have had to review a large variety of products, which could have entailed the requirement to review the claims of multiple vendors for the same products. The committee did not wish to try to distinguish between what was claimed for products and what they could actually deliver, nor did it want to subject itself or the National Academies to criticism for overlooking a particular vendor’s product. The committee held two meetings to familiarize its members with the capabilities required for homeland security and the applicable C4ISR technologies that are available or under development for the Army’s Future Force. Two more meetings were devoted to writing and coming to a consensus on the findings, conclusions, and recommendations presented in the report. As was the case with the first report, even as this report was being prepared doctrine and policy were being developed and amended at all levels of government. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Defense’s (DOD’s) Northern Command, which are to have the major responsibilities and authority for homeland security at the national level, had been established and were in the early stages of formation and organization. The actual role that will be played by the Army in homeland security must certainly depend in large measure on the operational assignments that Army units will be given in the framework of, or in support of, these overarching organizations. The details remain in a state of flux. As is indicated in the report, while it is anticipated that much of the doctrine will be drawn from existing protocols, the lack of specific doctrine made the study of specific equipment requirements difficult. 5   For example, the Defense Collaborative Tool Suite, a flexible COTS-based suite of applications software, is endorsed by the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Staff.

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR REPORT ORGANIZATION The introductory chapter provides a context for the rest of the report by describing the government’s organization for homeland security, beginning with the DHS, followed by the elements of the DOD that will play a role in homeland security, and lastly, the community of civilian emergency responders. A short section compares the ways in which the DOD and local emergency responders acquire their equipment. The chapter closes with a description of a series of potential scenarios illustrating how complexities will mount as additional events requiring emergency response take place. Chapter 2 describes how the Army plans to equip the Future Force, drawing attention to certain C4ISR technologies that offer potential for collaborative efforts by the DOD and the DHS. Chapter 3 describes who constitutes the emergency responder community, what they are trying to accomplish, and the kinds of capabilities and training they need; the chapter ends with a description of Project Responder, an independent effort focusing on the status of equipment for emergency responders. Chapter 4 provides a detailed description of a subset of C4ISR technologies for the Future Force that appear to match the requirements of emergency responders. Chapter 5 discusses possible ways of bridging the gap between the Future Force technologies and emergency responder requirements and suggests means to facilitate collaboration between the DOD and the DHS to help specify and meet those requirements. Chapter 6 provides a complete listing of the report’s findings, conclusions, and recommendations. Separate appendixes provide additional background information on committee biographies, meeting topics, organization of the U.S. Army, the Army acquisition system, C4ISR capabilities for the Army’s Future Force, C4ISR capabilities needed for the civilian emergency responder, and criteria for technology readiness levels. The committee would like to recognize the assistance given by the emergency responder community and the U.S. Army in providing information and answering questions from the committee. It is likewise grateful for the assistance of NRC staff members Margaret N. Novack, James C. Myska, Carter W. Ford, William E. Campbell, and Dorothy Sawicki in producing this report. John W. Lyons, Chair Dennis J. Reimer, Vice Chair Committee on Army Science and Technology for Homeland Defense—C4ISR

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR Acknowledgment of Reviewers This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s (NRC’s) Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: MG Jack D’Araujo, U.S. Army National Guard (retired), Knoxville, Tennessee Michael J. Grove, Consultant, Stafford, Virginia Michael J. Hopmeier, Unconventional Concepts, Inc., Arlington, Virginia James C. McGroddy, National Academy of Engineering, IBM (retired), Briarcliff Manor, New York Richard Nowakowski, Raytheon JPS Communications, Chicago, Illinois Jimmy K. Omura, National Academy of Engineering, Cylink Corporation (retired), San Francisco, California James Shea, Filtronic Sigteck, Inc., Columbia, Maryland George F. Sheldon, Institute of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill Paul N. Stockton, Naval Post Graduate School, Monterey, California Robert J. Trew, North Carolina State University, Raleigh

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Alexander H. Flax, Consultant. Appointed by the National Research Council, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR Contents     EXECUTIVE SUMMARY   1 1   INTRODUCTION   14      Background,   15      Organizing for Homeland Security,   17      Department of Homeland Security,   17      Department of Defense,   19      Emergency Responders,   24      Comparison of Acquisition in the Army and in the Emergency Responder Community,   25      Scenarios,   28      Scenario 1: Single Event, Single Location,   28      Scenario 2: Multiple Events, Single Location,   29      Scenario 3: Single Type of Event, Multiple Locations,   29      Scenario 4: Multiple Events, Multiple Locations,   29      Relationship to C4ISR Capabilities,   29      References,   31 2   CAPABILITIES FOR THE ARMY’S FUTURE FORCE   33      What Is the Future Force?,   33      Capabilities Envisioned for the Future Force,   34      Responsiveness,   35      Deployability,   35      Agility,   36

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR      Versatility,   36      Lethality,   37      Survivability,   37      Sustainability,   37      Network-Centric Warfare and the Future Force,   37      The Future Combat Systems Program,   38      The Future Force Warrior Program,   38      C4ISR Capabilities for the Future Force,   39      Summary,   41      References,   41 3   CAPABILITIES FOR EMERGENCY RESPONDERS   42      Ability to Respond to Many Threats,   42      Ability to Carry Out a Wide Range of Tasks,   45      Emergency Preparedness and Response Tasks,   46      Ability to Function Effectively in a Dangerous and/or Chaotic Environment,   48      C4ISR Capabilities for Emergency Responders,   49      Command, Control, and Computer Capabilities,   49      Communications Capabilities,   52      Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Capabilities,   54      Opportunities for Training and Exercises,   57      Training,   57      Exercises,   57      Project Responder,   58      Detection, Identification, and Assessment,   59      Unified Incident Command Decision Support and Interoperable Communications,   60      Emergency Management Preparation and Planning,   60      Crisis Evaluation and Management,   61      Summary of Project Responder Capability Assessment,   61      References,   64 4   DEFENSE TECHNOLOGIES FOR HOMELAND SECURITY   65      Introduction,   65      Overview and Scope,   65      Organization of This Chapter,   66      C4ISR Technical Description,   67      C4ISR Component Technologies and Programs,   69      Command, Control, and Computer Technologies,   69      Communications,   76

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR      Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance,   82      Additional Department of Defense Assets for Consideration,   88      Summary,   91      References,   92 5   POTENTIAL FOR COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE ARMY AND THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY   93      Potential Collaborative Efforts to Address Unmet Needs,   93      Leveraged Collaboration,   94      Joint Development Collaboration,   94      A Technological Bridge,   95      Collaboration Issues,   95      Systems Engineering,   95      Technology Transfer Coordination,   100      Experimentation, Testing, and Review,   101      Collaboration in Training Programs,   103      Network-Centric Operations,   104      Standardization Efforts,   104      Summary,   106      References,   106 6   COMPLETE LIST OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS   107      Overarching Recommendation,   107      From Chapter 1, “Introduction,”   108      From Chapter 2, “Capabilities for the Army’s Future Force,”   108      From Chapter 3, “Capabilities for Emergency Responders,”   109      From Chapter 4, “Defense Technologies for Homeland Security,”   109      From Chapter 5, “Potential for Collaboration Between the Army and the Department of Homeland Security,”   109     APPENDIXES         A BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS   115     B COMMITTEE MEETINGS   124     C ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE ARMY   128     D ARMY ACQUISITION SYSTEM   133     E C4ISR CAPABILITIES FOR THE FUTURE FORCE   137     F C4ISR CAPABILITIES FOR CIVILIAN EMERGENCY RESPONDERS   142     G CRITERIA FOR TECHNOLOGY READINESS LEVELS   146

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR Figures, Tables, and Boxes FIGURES 1-1   Organizational chart of the Department of Homeland Security as of March 1, 2003,   18 1-2   Organizational chart for the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense (ASD [HD]),   20 1-3   NORTHCOM command-and-control relationships,   22 2-1   Characteristics of the Army’s Future Force,   36 2-2   Basic elements of integrated Future Combat Systems (FCS),   39 TABLES ES-1   Bridge Between Department of the Army/DOD Science and Technology for the Future Force and Emergency Responder Requirements,   10 2-1   Expected Operational Benefits of the Army’s Future Force Concept for the Conduct of Joint Operations,   35 3-1   Capability Shortfalls for Emergency Responders in the Detection, Identification, and Assessment of Weapons of Mass Destruction Threats,   62 3-2   Capability Shortfalls for Emergency Responders in Unified Incident Command Decision Support and Interoperable Communications,   62

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR 3-3   Capability Shortfalls for Emergency Responders in Emergency Management Preparation and Planning for Weapons of Mass Destruction Scenarios,   63 3-4   Capability Shortfalls for Emergency Responders in Crisis Evaluation and Management for Weapons of Mass Destruction Scenarios,   63 4-1   Integrated Systems Technology Programs Relevant to Emergency Responders,   70 4-2   Summary of Programs Relevant to Emergency Responders: Command, Control, and Computer (C3) Technologies,   71 4-3   Summary of Programs Relevant to Emergency Responders: Communications,   77 4-4   Summary of Programs Relevant to Emergency Responders: Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR),   82 4-5   Summary of Programs Relevant to Emergency Responders: Other Assets for Consideration,   88 5-1   Bridge Between Department of the Army/DOD Science and Technology for the Future Force and Emergency Responder Requirements,   96 G-1   Criteria for Technology Readiness Levels,   146 BOXES 1-1   Some U.S. Agencies and Organizations Involved in Emergency Response,   16 1-2   Findings from Report 1 Relevant to the Current Report,   23 1-3   Conclusion and Recommendation from Report 1 Relevant to the Current Report,   26 2-1   Future Force Warrior Elements,   40 3-1   National Terrorism Response Objectives,   59

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR Acronyms ACTD Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration ANVG Advanced Night Vision Goggle ARNET Army Reserve Network ASD (HLD) Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense C communications C2 command and control C3 command, control, and communications C4ISR command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance CINC commander-in-chief COP common operational picture COTS commercial off-the-shelf DA Department of the Army DARPA Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency DASD Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense DDR&E Director, Defense Research and Engineering DHS Department of Homeland Security DISA Defense Information Systems Agency DMSO Defense Modeling and Simulation Office DOD Department of Defense DTRA Defense Threat Reduction Agency DUSD (S&T) Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Science and Technology

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR EPR Emergency Preparedness and Response (DHS directorate) FBCB2 Force XXI Battle Command Brigade and Below FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation FCS Future Combat System(s) FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FFW Future Force Warrior FOPEN foliage penetration GIG global information grid GIS Global Information System GPS Global Positioning System HSARPA Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency HSPD Homeland Security Presidential Directive IAB Interagency Board for Equipment Standardization and Interoperability IR infrared ISR intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance IT information technology JBFSA Joint Blue Force Situational Awareness JPO Joint Program Office JTF-CS Joint Task Forcce-Civil Support JTRS Joint Tactical Radio System LW Land Warrior LW-AC Land Warrior-advanced capability LW-IC Land Warrior-initial capability LW-SI Land Warrior-Stryker Interoperable M&S modeling and simulation METL Mission Essential Task List MTI moving target indicator NBC nuclear, biological, and chemical NCO network-centric operations NCW network-centric warfare NDMS National Disaster Medical System NEST Networked Embedded Systems Technology NGA National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency NGO nongovernmental organization

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR NIMS National Incident Management System NORTHCOM U.S. Northern Command NRC National Research Council NRP National Response Plan ODP Office of Domestic Preparedness ORD operational requirements document OSD Office of the Secretary of Defense PDA personal digital assistant PDASD Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense R&D research and development RDEC Research, Development, and Engineering Center RDT&E research, development, testing, and evaluation RSTA reconnaissance, surveillance, and target acquisition SAR synthetic aperture radar SCA software communications architecture SDR software-defined radio SIGINT/EW signals intelligence/electronic warfare S&T science and technology STO science and technology objective TDA tactical decision aid TRL technology readiness level TSWG Technical Support Working Group UAV unmanned aerial vehicle UGS unattended ground sensor UGV unmanned ground vehicle USAF U.S. Air Force USAR U.S. Army Reserve USN U.S. Navy US&T Undersecretary for Science and Technology UV ultraviolet WIN-T Warfighter Information Network-Tactical WMD weapons of mass destruction

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR This report is dedicated to General Donald R. Keith United States Army (Retired) for his quiet voice of reason, his untiring dedication, and his exemplary efforts toward making life better and safer for America and her soldiers.

OCR for page R1
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR This page intentionally left blank.