Finding 1-1. Although a number of informal mechanisms exist, no coherent planning paradigm for the interface between the military and the emergency responders currently exists, and although a national operational concept for emergency response is being developed, it is not yet a comprehensive framework that pulls together the efforts of federal, state, and local responders.

Finding 1-2. The U.S. Army has developed a number of capabilities that could be used by emergency responders:

  • Relevant technologies from the Army science and technology base;

  • C4ISR systems that have been developed and deployed by the Army;

  • An acquisition system, similar to the Army’s spiral development process, that encompasses identifying needs, funding the required technology, and developing fieldable products;

  • A testing and certification process for new equipment;

  • Training programs;

  • A network-centric operations approach;

  • Exercises (and supporting facilities);

  • Modeling and simulation capabilities; and

  • A process for the development and assessment of doctrine.


Finding 2-1. The network-centric concept is the foundation of the Army’s Future Force.

Conclusion 2-1. The U.S. Army possesses a large and varied number of Future Force science and technology programs that, with proper coordination, could be made available to the Department of Homeland Security; however, there is currently no planning process to identify which could be shared or how to do so.

Recommendation 2-1. The U.S. Army, through the Department of Defense, should work with the Department of Homeland Security to analyze and determine, among other items, appropriate planning processes necessary to determine which Future Force science and technology programs should be shared, and how best to go about doing this.

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