1. Planning Phase

The planning phase of the PPB system begins in October with a Joint Long Range Strategic Appraisal (JLRSA) and a follow-on Joint Strategic Planning Document (JSPD) submitted to OSD by the JCS. The JLRSA reflects the foreign policy inputs of other government agencies and identifies broad threats to national interests, while the JSPD is oriented towards defining the scope of military threats and the requirements for U.S. forces. The JSPD is, however, not resource-constrained.

In response to this input, OSD issues Draft Defense Guidance to the Services outlining (either generally or specifically) those military objectives and missions to be accomplished. Before being issued in its final form, the Defense Guidance is reviewed by the unified and specified commanders, whose comments are received by the Defense Resources Board (DRB). The Defense Guidance contains only one page of fiscal guidance identifying a single "topline" number for each Service.

2. Programming Phase

After the Defense Guidance is issued in January, the programming phase begins at the Service level as Program Objective Memoranda (POM's) are developed and submitted to OSD and OJCS in May. In reality, however, POM development begins much earlier as the Services receive projections of future requirements from their major commands and other institutional "claimants". The Services establish their own internal priorities and roadmaps for manning, equipping, training, and maintaining their respective organizations and infrastructures.

The POM's are openly reviewed by OSD and OJCS through the DRB for programmatic content, fulfillment of Defense Guidance, and duplication of effort. Prior to this DRB review, OJCS submits a formal critique of the Service POM's in the Joint Program Assessment Memorandum (JPAM). Through its seat on the DRB, OMB also has the opportunity to review the POM's. Also, the unified and specified commanders again appear before the DRB to provide comments on program issues. The programming phase ends when the Secretary of Defense issues Program Decision Memoranda (PDM's) which represent the formal, albeit temporary, conclusion of internal debate on most major program issues.

3. Budgeting Phase

The budgeting phase begins in September as the Services' budget estimates are reviewed for their accuracy and the consistency of their economic assumptions. The budgeting phase is further characterized by a more detailed definition and incorporation of the overall fiscal constraints being imposed through OMB and fact-oflife adjustments, such as those which might flow from congressional action on the current year's budget or from changes in program execution during the previous year.

December brings final, government-wide, action on the Federal budget and the resolution of any unresolved major program issues. The President's budget request is submitted within 15 days after the Congress reconvenes, usually in January.

4. Description of Key PPBS Documents

Enclosure 2 of DoD Instruction 7045.7 describes the key PPBS documents as follows.

a. Joint Long Range Strategic Appraisal (JLRSA)

The JLRSA is submitted by the JCS to provide transition from long-range to mid-range strategic planning. The JLRSA is intended to stimulate more sharply focused strategic studies. Additionally, the JLRSA influences the development of the JSPD.

b. Joint Strategic Planning Document (JSPD)

The JSPD is submitted by the JCS to provide military advice to the President, the National Security Council, and the Secretary of Defense. It contains a concise, comprehensive military appraisal of the threats to U.S. worldwide interests and objectives, a statement of recommended military objectives derived from national objectives, and the recommended military strategy to attain national objectives. It includes a summary of the JCS planning force levels required to execute the approved national military strategy with a reasonable assurance of success, and views on the attainability of these forces in consideration of fiscal responsibility, manpower resources, material availability, technology, industrial capacity, and interoperability in joint and cross-Service programs. The JSPD also appraises the capabilities and risks associated with programmed force levels, based on the planning forces considered necessary to execute the strategy as a benchmark, and recommends changes to the force planning and programming guidance. The JSPD provides a vehicle for an exchange of views on defense policy among the President, the Secretary of Defense, the National Security Council, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

c. Defense Guidance (DG)

After consideration of the military advice of the JCS, as expressed in the JLRSA and JSPD, the Secretary of Defense issues a draft of the DG to solicit the comments of all DoD components, including the operational commands, on the major issues, problems, and resource constraints in developing and programming forces to execute the policy, strategy, and management direction. The draft DG is also provided for comment to the Department of State, the staff of the National Security Council, and the Office of Management and Budget. The final version of the DG, which is the principal output of the planning phase, serves as an authoritative statement directing defense policy, strategy, force and resource planning, and fiscal guidance for development of the POM's. The DG consists of the following elements: near and long-term threat assessment and opportunities; policy and strategy guidance; force planning guidance; resource planning guidance; fiscal guidance; and unresolved issues requiring further study.

d. Program Objective Memoranda (POM's)

Annually, each Military Department and Defense Agency prepares and submits to the Secretary of Defense a POM that is consistent with the strategy and guidance, both programmatic and fiscal, stated in the DG. Major issues that are required to be resolved during the year of submission must be identified. Supporting

information for POM's should be in accordance with the annual POM Preparation Instructions or requirements established by DoD directive or instruction.

e. Joint Program Assessment Memorandum (JPAM)

The JPAM is submitted by the JCS for consideration in reviewing the POM's, developing Issue Books (discussed in the next paragraph), and drafting Program Decision Memoranda (PDS's; discussed later). It provides a risk assessment based on the composite of the POM force recommendations and includes the views of the JCS on the balance and capabilities of the overall POM force and support levels to execute the approved national military strategy. When appropriate, the JCS recommends actions to achieve improvements in overall defense capabilities within alternative funding levels directed by the Secretary of Defense.

f. Issue Books (IB's)

Based on a review of the POM's in relation to the Defense Guidance and JPAM, Issue Books are prepared by the OSD staff, the DoD components, and OMB. One-page outlines of proposed major issues may be submitted by any Defense Resources Board or Program Review Group (PRG) (a working group subordinate to the DRB) member. The issues are to have broad policy, force, program, or resource implications. Particular emphasis is given to crossService issues that have not been adequately, or consistently, addressed in the POM's. Major issues that were decided during the previous year's program and budget review are addressed only if some major new factors have appeared since that decision.

The proposed issues are first reviewed by the PRG, which recommends whether or not they are appropriate for DRB consideration. The selected issues are developed by an issue team under the direction of a lead office designated by the PRG, and assigned to one of the IB's. Issue Books are sent to the DRB for their review. The full Defense Resources Board meets to discuss the issues. The major issues that are raised during the program review are measured against the Defense Guidance, against available budgetary resources, and against management initiatives. The program produced as a result of the review should demonstrate the maximum degree of policy implementation consistent with national resource limitations. The Deputy Secretary of Defense makes all appropriate decisions after consultation with the Secretary.

g. Program Decision Memoranda (PDM's)

DRB program review decisions are recorded in a set of Program Decision Memoranda (PDM's), signed by the Secretary or the Deputy Secretary of Defense, and distributed to DoD components and OMB. The PDM's then form the basis for the budget submissions.

h. Budget Estimates

Annually, each DoD component submits its budget estimates to the Secretary of Defense. The budget estimates include the prior, current, and budget fiscal years (budget year plus one for programs requiring congressional authorization) in accordance with established procedures. Data for the outyears (the 4 years beyond the

budget year) are derived from, or are consistent with, the FiveYear Defense Plan update coincident with the submission of budget estimates. Budget estimates are prepared and submitted based on the program as approved in the PDM's, and on economic assumptions related to pay and pricing policies. The Assistant Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), in close coordination with the Director, OMB, develops and promulgates the applicable economic assumptions. These assumptions are contained in separately prescribed detailed budget guidance each year, if they are not available in time to be included in the PDM's. Subsequent modifications may be necessary to remain consistent with administration policy.

E. PROBLEM AREAS AND CAUSES

The problem areas in the PPB system lay primarily at each end of the process, i.e. planning and execution. However, there are also latent concerns about the overall length, complexity, and instability of the PPBS cycle. This section identifies seven problem areas in the PPB system and presents analyses of the contributing causes. First, strategic planning is ineffective. Second, there is an insufficient relationship between strategic planning and fiscal constraints. Third, there is an absence of realistic fiscal guidance. Fourth, the output side of the defense program is not emphasized in the PPBS. Fifth, the JCS system is unable to make meaningful programmatic inputs. Sixth, within the PPB system, there is insufficient attention to execution oversight and control. Last, the PPBS cycle is too long, complex, and unstable.

It should be noted that none of these seven problem areas are new. Various study efforts within the Department of Defense, by other government agencies, and by the defense academic community -have previously cited these problems in PPBS. In particular, the current administration undertook an assessment of PPBS shortly after entering office. This assessment, conducted by Vincent Puritano, then Assistant Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), and completed on March 13, 1981, identified 21 deficiencies in the PPB system. As summarized in testimony before the Senate Committee on Armed Services on November 10, 1983 (Part 9, pages 388-394), the deficiencies included:

o the failure to create a credible planning system;

• planning was irrelevant or useless during the programming and budgeting phases;

。 the existence of an objectives-force (policy-capabilities) mismatch;

• an imbalance between modernization and readiness funding; • "tail-end perturbations" in PPBS as major budget reductions were required late in the cycle by OMB and presidential decisions on fiscal levels;

• tendency of the JCS not to play an active part in the programming phase;

• neglect of execution;

• only limited feedback to policymakers/programmers to improve subsequent cycles; and

• program instability.