Naval Analytical Capabilities assesses current Department of Defense initiatives and the Department of the Navy's progress in transitioning from a requirements-based to a capabilities-based organization. The report also provides recommendations aimed at improving the organizational structure of the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations to best position the Chief of Naval Operations to fulfill his Title 10 (U.S. Code on Armed Forces) responsibilities. This report addresses key elements of capabilities-based planning, examines Navy analytical processes, and recommends an approach to making improvements.

Naval Analytical Capabilities assesses current Department of Defense initiatives and the Department of the Navy's progress in transitioning from a requirements-based to a capabilities-based organization. The report also provides recommendations aimed at improving the organizational structure of the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations to best position the Chief of Naval Operations to fulfill his Title 10 (U.S. Code on Armed Forces) responsibilities. This report addresses key elements of capabilities-based planning, examines Navy analytical processes, and recommends an approach to making improvements.

An analytical framework and methodology for capability-area reviews is described, along with new tools to support capabilities analysis and strategic-level defense planning in the Defense Department and the Services. BCOT generates and screens preliminary options, and the Portfolio-Analysis Tool (PAT) is used to evaluate options that pass screening. The concepts are illustrated with applications to Global Strike and Ballistic Missile Defense. Recommendations are made for further defense-planning research.

Forty years ago the Naval Studies Board was created at the request of then Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Elmo R. Zumwalt, Jr. As stated in his request to the National Academy of Sciences, he thought it important for the Navy to have an outside resource to which it could turn "for independent and outside counsel on any area of its responsibilities involving the interplay of scientific and technical matters with other national issues." Admiral Zumwalt, together with Under Secretary of the Navy Honorable David S. Potter and President of the National Academy of Sciences Dr. Philip Handler, recognized the importance of not only continuing but also focusing and strengthening the relationship that had existed between the National Academy of Sciences and the Department of the Navy since the Academy's creation in 1863. To commemorate this special anniversary, Naval Studies Board 40th Anniversary provides an overview of the history, mission, and accomplishments of the Board. In the coming years, the Naval Studies Board will continue to serve as a source of independent, long-range, scientific and technical planning advice for the nation's naval forces. It will also work to ensure that the relationships between the operational, science, engineering, and technical communities remain as strong and productive as ever to ensure that progress continues in areas most critical to meeting future naval forces' needs.

The Navy has put forth a new construct for its strike forces that enables more effective forward deterrence and rapid response. A key aspect of this construct is the need for flexible, adaptive command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR) systems. To assist development of this capability, the Navy asked the NRC to examine C4ISR for carrier, expeditionary, and strike and missile defense strike groups, and for expeditionary strike forces. This report provides an assessment of C4ISR capabilities for each type of strike group; recommendations for C4ISR architecture for use in major combat operations; promising technology trends; and an examination of organizational improvements that can enable the recommended architecture.

An examination of analysis and analysis practices for defense planning, the paper1s purpose is to delineate priorities for the way ahead, i.e., for investments and other actions to ensure that future models and simulations will serve the needs of decisionmakers. The analysis in question is accomplished for Quadrennial Reviews and for continuing work on capability assessments, requirements analysis, and program analysis.