NATO Logistics Handbook October 1997

Chapter 18: NATO Military Common-Funded Resources Capability Packages (1) 1809. As part of the transition to a more integrated approach to military common resources management, the Council has adopted the CP process of identifying and validating military common resource requirements as a means to link these requirements with the Alliance defence planning process. Progressively, military requirements are being met on the basis of CPs. There are four distinct phases in the CP process: CP definition, CP submission, CP approval and CP implementation. CP Definition 1810. CP definition is aimed at providing the link between the military common resources and the Defence Planning Process. On the basis of the Ministerial Guidance, the Force Goal Process produces specific planning targets for individual countries to meet in order to provide the Alliance with the overall level of forces and capabilities to implement NATO strategy. The Force Goals should strike a balance between military requirements, technical feasibility, available resources and political considerations. 1811. MC Guidance for Defence Planning (2) amplifies the Principal Military Requirements (PMR) outlined in MC 400/1 and identifies the required Military Functions (MF). This forms the basis for the development by the NMAs of their required capabilities. The Major NATO Commands (MNCs) issue annual guidance for the preparation of new CPs. The Major Subordinate Commands (MSCs), in consultation with their Principal Subordinate Commands (PSCs), Host Nations, and user nations, develop the CPs that support the required capabilities within their area of responsibility. There is no fixed guidelines as to what constitutes a properly sized CP. However, it is clear that a CP must be manageable in terms of scope, cost and implementability. The cost and complexity must be such as to allow package execution within a reasonable timeframe, normally five to seven years from the time of approval. CP Submission 1812. At this stage, the NMAs identify additional requirements by comparing required assets to available assets. It is accomplished primarily by the MSC under responsibility of the MNC and with assistance of the PSCs. It is important that CP definition is closely coordinated with host/user nations, to make sure that nations can fully support the CPs during the CP approval process. The following steps can be identified: The identification of those minimum resources (forces, armaments, logistics, and infrastructure assets) that must be available to accomplish the required capability. The infrastructure assets should be identified by type and number of installations (communications facilities, air defence facilities, naval bases, airfields, headquarters, pipelines, etc.) that must be available to meet the required capability. The determination of those installations which currently exist to satisfy the required capability identified in the step described above. This analysis will include all NATO and potentially available national military and civil assets that could satisfy the requirement. The selection of those installations available to support the required capability together with the related common-funded Operation and Maintenance costs and NATO Manpower. If existing NATO or national infrastructure assets are not adequate to support the required capability, this step must identify either common-funded or nationally funded additional investment requirements either for new installation(s) or to satisfy shortfalls in existing installations, including the relation to common-funded Operation and Maintenance costs and NATO Manpower. CP Approval 1813. CPs are submitted to NATO Headquarters for approval upon their completion. The International Staff (IS), together with the International Military Staff (IMS), will prepare a joint screening report to be considered by both the SRB and the MC. This report will address the feasibility, implementability, eligibility for common-funding and affordability within the agreed planning framework, the MTRP of the submitted CP. 1814. The SRB's primary focus is on affordability. Its respon-sibilities, however, include determining the feasibility and eligibility for common-funding, addressing both national and international resource implications and political aspects. The MC considers CPs from a military requirement point of view, assigning the military priority on which basis CPs will compete for funding. 1815. Approval of the CP constitutes a commitment that the necessary resources, including international manpower, will be made available. Concerning the nationally funded portion, approval of the CP constitutes a commitment to make the identified national facilities available to NATO and to implement any additional requirements. By the same token, Council/DPC approval of a CP constitutes the tasker to the implementation committees to start implementation. CP Implementation 1816. As was mentioned, implementation of CPs is the responsibility of the implementation committees, within the broad policy guidance provided by the SRB on matters of resource allocation. Concerning those CPs for which no requirements exists for common-funded or nationally funded additional investment either for new installations or to satisfy shortcomings on existing installations, the implementation committees will make sure that the necessary resources are available. For those CPs for which additional investment is necessary, the IC is responsible for managing the implementation of the common-funded investments. Both the MBC and the NDMC are involved in managing the provision of sufficient operation and maintenance support and international manpower. 1817. In cases where a total reassessment of the requirement forms the basis for a new CP, a CP will be subject to the full review and approval process as outlined above. Normally, such major reassessments would take place every six to eight years. In case major changes to approved CPs are necessary, either changing the military requirement as endorsed by the MC or impacting on the resource allocation ceilings endorsed by the SRB in the framework of the MTRP, submission to the MC and/or the SRB and approval by the Council/DPC are required. Adaptations occurring during the normal implementation of CPs fall within the responsibility of the implementing committees. Footnotes A combination of national and NATO funded infrastructure, associated costs and manpower which, together with the military forces and other essential requirements, enable a NATO Commander to achieve a specific military required capability MC 299/5(Final)