IMAP_v15.3_Vol_I_2015-12-15_Signed.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY

5700 18th Street Fort Belvoir, VA 22060

BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM (BMDS)

INTEGRATED MASTER ASSESSMENT PLAN (IMAP) 15.3

VOLUME I

December 15, 2015

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT D

Further dissemination only as directed by DoD, Missile Defense Agency Attn: MDA/DE, 5700 18th Street, Fort Belvoir, VA, or higher authority.

MDA-EEA-0006

Integrated Master Assessment Plan - Volume I IMAP Version 15.3 ii

This Page Intentionally Left Blank iv v

Executive Summary

Purpose. Per MDA Directive 5000.05, MDA/DE, as the Single Technical Authority for the BMDS, established the IMAP as the top-level plan for assessing BMDS incremental deliveries.

The Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) Integrated Master Assessment Plan (IMAP) consists of two volumes, each with a specific purpose:

Volume I: To document the approved Missile Defense Agency (MDA) planning process for delivering test and analysis data that enables assessment of BMDS capability in support of developmental and operational decisions.

Volume II: To document the approved MDA plan for assessing incremental BMDS deliveries in support of decisions to change the Operational Capacity Baseline (OCB) and facilitating operational acceptance of deliveries into the fielded BMDS.

Overview. The IMAP planning process described in this document enables BMDS assessors to support critical developmental and operational decisions by providing an avenue for capturing and satisfying assessment requirements related to integrated BMDS behavior. The BMDS data collected and analyzed in response to these assessment requirements becomes part of the objective evidence needed to inform decisions.

The IMAP process is primarily supported by test and analysis venues that produce data that define Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) system-level behavior, that is, venues where Elements are integrated into an instance of the deployed BMDS supporting one or more Combatant Commands (CCMDs) in execution of their BMD mission. Data collected through these venues augment data produced at the Element level to comprehensively characterize BMDS capabilities and limitations.

The intent is that all BMDS assessors, MDA internal and external, regardless of the specific focus, subscribe to the IMAP planning process whenever data from BMDS-level venues is required to execute an assessment. Organizations electing not to follow the IMAP process accept the risk that data to support decisions may not be met through system-level testing. It is incumbent on all assessors to articulate assessment requirements by first identifying the specific decisions that are supported, and then describing the assessment that is required to inform those decisions. The IMAP process captures those assessment requirements along with the associated data needs, and uses this information to identify the test and analysis venues capable of producing the required data. Although assessment requirements can be allocated to any venue captured in the BMDS Integrated Master Test Plan (IMTP), BMDS assessment predominately relies on ground test and M&S events to produce data required to support BMDS incremental delivery and operational acceptance. Additionally, assessment requirements are used to identify required ground test and digital Modeling and Simulation (M&S) capability that is formally documented in the respective M&S System Requirements Documents (SRDs) and resulting M&S design products.

vi vii

Document Change / Revision Record

Version Date Change Affected Pages

11.1 14 February

Initial Version All

12.1 14 December

Semi-Annual Update All

12.2 31 July 2012 Semi-Annual Update All

13.1 7 December

Semi-Annual Update All

13.2 31 May 2013 Semi-Annual Update All

15.1 15 July 2015 This is a major revision:

IMAP Version 15.1 (v15.1) represents a major change in content and organization compared to previous IMAP releases. The IMAP document is separated into two volumes with the intent of clarifying the assessment processes for DE and the broader assessment community, and more clearly documenting the plan for assessing incremental BMDS deliveries. As an additional benefit, IMAP v15.1, Volume I is an unclassified document which makes it more readily available on MDA’s Unclassified network.

All

15.3 15 December

Updated to Version 15.3 to incorporate the following in Volume I:

• Added Chapter 6 on BMDS Operational Assessment Volume II:

• Alignment with the 15.3 versions of the BMD SDD, BMD SS, and MIP (PB2016/FY2015 Marks Update)

• Addition of Warfighter TLOs starting in Inc 4

• Addition of end of increment architecture representation

• Expanded threat section

All viii ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Purpose .......................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.2 Applicability and Scope ................................................................................................ 1-1

1.3 Documentation .............................................................................................................. 1-2 2 BMDS ASSESSMENT .................................................................................. 2-1

2.1 BMDS Incremental Delivery ........................................................................................ 2-1

2.2 IMAP Support of BMDS Decisions .............................................................................. 2-2

2.3 BMDS Developmental and Operational Assessment ................................................... 2-3

2.3.1 Developmental Assessment ................................................................................... 2-3

2.3.2 Operational Assessment ......................................................................................... 2-3

2.3.3 Integrated Developmental and Operational Testing .............................................. 2-4

2.4 Assessment Areas .......................................................................................................... 2-4

2.5 Assessment Stakeholders .............................................................................................. 2-5

2.5.1 MDA Element Program Offices ............................................................................ 2-5

2.5.2 MDA Engineering .................................................................................................. 2-6

2.5.3 MDA International Programs ................................................................................ 2-6

2.5.4 MDA Cybersecurity ............................................................................................... 2-6

2.5.5 MDA Quality and Safety ....................................................................................... 2-6

2.5.6 Warfighter .............................................................................................................. 2-7

2.5.7 Operational Test Agency ....................................................................................... 2-7 3 MDA ASSESSMENT PLANNING .............................................................. 3-1

3.1 Technical Content ......................................................................................................... 3-2

3.2 Assessment Considerations ........................................................................................... 3-2

3.3 Top Level Objectives (TLOs) ....................................................................................... 3-3

3.4 Decisions ....................................................................................................................... 3-4

3.5 Establishing Assessment Priorities ............................................................................... 3-5

3.6 IMAP Approval ............................................................................................................. 3-5

4 ASSESSMENT DRIVEN GROUND TEST PLANNING ......................... 4-1

4.1 Integrated Master Test Plan (IMTP) ............................................................................. 4-1

4.1.1 Test Objectives....................................................................................................... 4-2

4.1.2 Resource Requirements ......................................................................................... 4-2

4.2 Test Event Planning and Execution .............................................................................. 4-2

5 BMD SYSTEM TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT .......................................... 5-1

6 BMD SYSTEM OPERATIONAL ASSESSMENT .................................... 6-1

APPENDIX A – ABBREVIATIONS AND ACROYNYMS ................................ A-1

APPENDIX B – GLOSSARY ..........................................................................................B-1

APPENDIX C – FUNCTIONAL DESCRIPTION TABLE ................................. C-1

APPENDIX D – ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENT DEVELOPMENT .......... D-1

APPENDIX E – M&S PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ..............................E-1

x

APPENDIX F – REFERENCES ..................................................................................... F-1

TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 2-1 - BMDS Engineering "V" ................................................................. 2-1 Figure 2-2 - Decision Driven Assessment and Testing ..................................... 2-2 Figure 2-3 - BMDS Assessment Areas ............................................................... 2-5 Figure 3-1 - Assessment Planning Process ......................................................... 3-1 Figure 3-2 - IMAP Stakeholder Assessment Requirement Development ...... 3-4 Figure 4-1 - IMAP Driven Strategic Test Planning .......................................... 4-1 Figure 4-2 - IMAP Driven Detailed Test Planning ........................................... 4-3 Figure D-1 - Example Engagement Space ........................................................ D-4 Figure D-2 - Example Spider Chart with Condition Ranges .......................... D-5 Figure D-3 - BMDS Tiered Assessment ............................................................ D-7 Figure D-4 - Assessment Configuration Sheet (ACS) Form View ............... D-10 xi

1-1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose

Per MDA Directive 5000.05, MDA/DE, as the Single Technical Authority for the BMDS, established the IMAP as the top-level plan for assessing BMDS incremental deliveries. The BMDS IMAP consists of two volumes, each with a specific purpose:

Volume I: To document the approved MDA planning process for delivering test and analysis data that enables assessment of BMDS capability in support of developmental and operational decisions.

Volume II: To document the approved MDA plan for assessing incremental BMDS deliveries in support of decisions to change the OCB and facilitating operational acceptance of deliveries into the fielded BMDS.

1.2 Applicability and Scope

The IMAP process is focused on the assessment of incremental BMDS deliveries and their impact on the capabilities and limitations of the fielded BMDS. As such, the IMAP process is primarily supported by test and analysis venues that produce data to inform system-level assessment. These are venues where Elements are integrated into representations of the deployed BMDS supporting in one or more CCMDs in execution of their BMD mission. Data collected through these venues augment data produced at the Element level to support characterizing BMDS capabilities and limitations.

All organizations, both internal and external to MDA, requiring data from BMD system-level sources not currently available from previous tests or other venues to assess BMDS capability, must follow the MDA processes designed to capture their data requirements. These processes ensure data requirements are clearly understood and addressed. The data requirements are allocated to test and analysis venues to enable development of test objectives and associated test/analysis event planning. Event execution ultimately delivers the data used for assessing BMDS capabilities and limitations.

The IMAP process captures the questions that must be answered to support technical and operational decisions. These questions drive the development of assessment requirements that are the primary basis for the BMDS Integrated and Distributed Ground Test (GTI/GTD) and standalone M&S event design reflected in the IMTP. The assessment requirements are critical for developing event-specific test objectives and test cases. The primary flight test design driver is flight test requirements as documented in the Flight Test Strategic Plan (FTSP); therefore, any flight test data collection needs as identified via the IMAP process are included in the FTSP to ensure BMDS capabilities and limitations are fully characterized. Assessment requirements are also the basis for establishing M&S needs that lead to the development of M&S solutions to

1-2 support assessment. Organizations electing not to follow the IMAP process accept the risk that data to support decisions may not be met through system-level testing. Given the critical role of system-level testing in BMDS technical delivery and operational fielding decisions, it is important that assessment stakeholders maximize their role in the IMAP process.

Assessment requirements captured through the IMAP process primarily focus on defining data needed from BMDS-level venues; however, subsystem-level data is sometimes used to augment system-level data to address behavior in a system context. Requirements for this subsystem-level data are captured through the IMAP process, as required. More generally, system assessment leverages all available Element data, Exercise data, Ground Test data, and Flight Test (FT) results to produce a comprehensive understanding of BMDS behavior and associated capabilities and limitations.

1.3 Documentation

As noted in Section 1.1, the IMAP consists of two volumes, each with a specific purpose.

Volume I is an unclassified document that is posted to the MDA unclassified portal under the System Assessment Directorate (MDA/DE/EEA). Volume II is a classified document that is posted to the MDA classified portal under MDA/DE/EEA.

Formal publication of the IMAP document occurs once each fiscal year (FY). Critical changes to the BMDS development program that occur between formal IMAP publication and impact BMDS delivery schedule and content are tracked by MDA/DE/EEA. Assessment stakeholders impacted by these changes are kept apprised so that detailed assessment plans and requirements can be adjusted and further communicated to event and analysis planners.

All assessment requirements captured by the IMAP process are maintained in the System Test and Assessment Requirements Tool (START) database application. START is compatible with the MDA requirements and test planning databases and supports day-to-day execution of the IMAP process. Updates to the database are configuration managed and coordinated with all assessment stakeholders. Outputs of the database support M&S development (described in Appendix E) and event planning (described in Chapter 4).

2-1

2 BMDS ASSESSMENT

The IMAP process is focused on the “Assess” aspect of the Engineering “V” (Figure 2-1). The engineering activity executed in order to plan, define, design, develop, and verify Element capability, prior to integrating and testing that capability within a BMDS context, follows the engineering process outlined in the MDA Systems Engineering Plan (SEP).

Figure 2-1 - BMDS Engineering "V"

2.1 BMDS Incremental Delivery

In accordance with Department of Defense (DoD) Directive 5134.09, MDA adheres to an evolutionary acquisition strategy, which provides for rapid acquisition of mature technology for the operational user and fielding of technical capability as soon as “technically practicable.” An evolutionary approach recognizes early the need for future capability improvements. The BMDS development plan as captured in the BMD System Description Document (SDD) contains functionality that is parsed into increments, with each increment intended to provide a significant increase in operational capability within a specified timeframe. Each increment is a militarily useful and supportable operational capability that can be developed, produced, deployed, and sustained.

Incremental BMDS deliveries include upgrades to fielded Elements, Element deployment to a specified geographic location, and the addition of new Elements to the fielded BMDS. Each Element delivery within an increment culminates in a decision to update the Operational Capacity Baseline (OCB), which is a listing of MDA approved BMDS-level hardware and software available for the Warfighters to use to defend the United States, deployed forces, friends, and allies. MDA Directive 5000.17 establishes policy to ensure the MDA uses

2-2 comprehensive, well-defined procedures and a disciplined process to determine hardware and software readiness for inclusion into the BMDS OCB.

The BMDS Master Integration Plan (MIP) establishes the plan for Element integration and documents the Element implementation of functionality allocated to BMDS increments as captured in the BMD SDD and BMD System Specification (SS). The MIP aligns functional capabilities over time by defining the required focused integration needs and identifying early integration opportunities to foster synchronized delivery and drive design assurance across the

BMDS.

2.2 IMAP Support of BMDS Decisions

BMDS assessment is executed to inform developmental and operational decisions. Figure 2-2 captures the decision focused cycle for executing assessment. The IMAP process is primarily focused on explicit decisions to change the OCB and operationally accept delivered capability into the fielded BMDS. System assessment results are reported as BMDS capabilities and limitations, which are supported by the objective evidence collected from BMDS-level test and analysis events, and select Element-level data.

The IMAP process also facilitates assessment in support of explicit and non-explicit decisions not connected to the OCB. For example, it supports ongoing efforts of assessment stakeholders to better characterize the overall capabilities and limitations of the BMDS. The results of all assessment activity are leveraged by the MDA and operational community to support decisions on deploying/employing the BMDS as well as in determining how future BMDS capability will be developed.

Figure 2-2 - Decision Driven Assessment and Testing

2-3

2.3 BMDS Developmental and Operational Assessment

The assessment of incremental BMDS deliveries is an ongoing activity resulting in the continuous refinement of BMDS capabilities and limitations, and facilitating operational assessment consisting of the Operational Test Agency’s (OTA) assessment and US Strategic Command’s (USSTRATCOM) BMDS Operational Readiness and Acceptance (OR&A) process executed on behalf of the Warfighter. The IMAP process facilitates capturing MDA, OTA and Warfighter assessment requirements to ensure that appropriate data collection is planned and required data is made available for assessment.

2.3.1 Developmental Assessment

BMDS development assessment is executed by MDA. The primary objective of the developmental assessment is to evaluate the performance capabilities and limitations of the BMDS Architecture1 as it evolves. It is intended to demonstrate: 1) MDA developed and delivered what it intended to deliver, and 2) the performance impact of those deliveries, along with the associated capabilities and limitations, on operational capability. Developmental assessment also provides insight into the BMDS operational integrity and confirms system safety under various configurations.

Developmental assessment addresses the status of BMDS from a developer's perspective (MDA’s viewpoint), to include the capabilities and limitations of the BMDS related to requirements implementation and system performance. Developmental assessment requires a clear understanding of Warfighter needs and BMDS development intent as reflected in the MDA Technical Baseline (TBL)2. Developmental assessment enables the MDA to reach decisions regarding the delivery of incremental BMDS capability, and is leveraged by the operational community to reach decisions regarding operational acceptance.

2.3.2 Operational Assessment

BMDS Operational Assessment is executed by the BMDS OTA, in support of the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) and the Warfighter (represented by the Joint Functional Component Command for Integrated Missile Defense (JFCC IMD)). Each assessor executes an assessment driven by specific charter or mission. These consist of the DoD’s DOT&E Annual Report to Congress, the BMDS OTA’s test assessments and rolling assessments, and the two BMDS assessment made by USSTRATCOM JFCC IMD. One is the Global Integrated Air and Missile Defense Assessment (GIAMDA) annual report and the other assessment supports USSTRATCOM operational acceptance of new BMDS capabilities using

1 The IMAP document uses the phrase BMDS Architecture to refer to the BMDS subsystems captured in the OCB and, depending on timeframe, includes planned changes to the fielded BMDS as reflected in the BMD SDD. The communications infrastructure required to enable interoperation of a deployed BMDS architecture is implicit to this terminology.

2 The MDA Technical Baseline (TBL) is one of six formally managed baselines. The glossary to this document describes each baseline.

2-4 their BMDS Operational Readiness and Acceptance (OR&A) process. Operational assessment is informed by independent data analysis, test observations, and an informed understanding of system design.

Each organization conducting an operational assessment of the BMDS has identified Critical Operational Issues (COIs) pertaining to its role in the assessment process. DOT&E has identified a set of COIs (which are reported to Congress annually) to characterize the operational effectiveness, interoperability, suitability, and survivability of the BMDS. The JFCC IMD has identified Warfighter COIs in the BMDS Warfighter Capability Acceptance document. These COIs are used in the Warfighter's Operational Readiness and Acceptance (OR&A) process that quantifies BMDS subsystem capabilities and limitations, and supports assessments that determine if a Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) capability is ready to be fielded based on Warfighter understanding of new / upgraded BMDS element capabilities and limitations. COIs are also used in the OR&A process to ensure informed Commander, US Strategic Command (CDRUSSTRATCOM) decisions, on behalf of the Warfighters, for formal acceptance of new / upgraded BMDS capabilities. Similarly, the BMDS OTA Team uses COIs in its Operational Assessment of the BMDS capabilities.

Operational assessments support Warfighter efforts in developing/refining Warfighter Tactics, Techniques and Procedures (TTPs), Pre-planned Responses (PPRs), Operational Plans (OPLANs), and other technical/tactical guidance on how the BMDS can be more effectively employed. Operational assessments can also lead to changes in Prioritized Capability List (PCL) and Modification and Fielding Request List (MFRL) content.

2.3.3 Integrated Developmental and Operational Testing

Due to the costly nature of live BMDS testing and limited Hardware-in-the-Loop (HWIL) laboratory infrastructure, MDA and the Operational Community have adopted an integrated approach for conducting combined, or integrated, Developmental Testing (DT) and Operational Testing (OT). MDA utilizes cooperative planning and execution to satisfy both developmental and operational assessment needs leveraging the test infrastructure and data from DT or OT focused test events depending on overarching goals and objectives. Both developmental and operational assessment support characterization of BMDS performance and subsequent decisions. DT objectives are defined by MDA, and OT objectives are defined by the BMDS OTA with concurrence from DOT&E. The Warfighter objectives are submitted by JFCC IMD.

In the context of delivering and accepting BMDS capability, the IMAP process enables BMDS testing and analysis to more optimally deliver data in support of assessment.

2.4 Assessment Areas

Figure 2-3 depicts developmental (in blue) and operational (in black/gray) areas that assessors must evaluate to deliver, field, and employ BMDS capability. Although several areas are categorized as having a subsystem focus, this is not intended to imply that system-level testing and assessment are not required. The approach to executing a comprehensive assessment plan

2-5 tailors testing requirements to the evidence that is needed and can draw from both subsystem-and system-level data, as necessary. All evidence collected in evaluating developmental areas is shared with the operational community.

Figure 2-3 - BMDS Assessment Areas

2.5 Assessment Stakeholders

BMDS assessment is executed by numerous assessors, both internal and external to MDA. In general, each assessor is intent on understanding and characterizing BMDS behavior in support of their specific organizational mission. They develop that understanding by identifying needed assessment data, followed by analyzing and assessing data collected from multiple sources.

Data sources include subsystem data, system test and analysis data, selected exercise data, and operational data, with GT data potentially supplemented with standalone, digital M&S data. The use of data from across the multiple data sources is dependent on specific assessor objectives and associated decisions.

2.5.1 MDA Element Program Offices

BMDS development is executed by Program Offices at the subsystem-level. Element Program Offices are responsible for ensuring that deliveries meet the requirements captured in the BMDS Technical Baseline. Subsystem assessment primarily relies on evidence developed at the Element Program Office level. This includes executing Formal Qualification Testing (FQT) of delivered hardware and software and includes verification of all associated requirements. When system-level data is required to support decisions at the subsystem-level, Program Offices participate in system-level planning and execution, via the IMAP Process, to ensure required data is identified for collection and delivery.

2-6

2.5.2 MDA Engineering

The MDA Director for Engineering (MDA/DE) executes developmental assessment of overall BMDS performance focusing on effectiveness and interoperability to characterize the capabilities and limitations of the fielded system and the associated impact of BMDS deliveries.

The intent of this assessment is to answer questions regarding whether BMDS deliveries were developed in accordance with the prescribed requirements and met design intent, as well as to ensure that the characterization of BMDS capabilities and limitations supports BMDS operational employment and future development. System assessment augments data produced at the Element level with data from venues that represent the integrated BMDS. Although MDA/DE relies on the Element Program Offices to verify requirements, MDA/DE also assesses the status of requirements verification relative to BMDS incremental deliveries to ensure that capabilities and limitations accurately account for system level requirements that have not been implemented and verified.

2.5.3 MDA International Programs

Assessment in support of international programs focuses primarily on interoperability and the ability to effectively coordinate engagements between the BMDS and BMD capabilities of friends and allies. The U.S.-Israeli Cooperative Program Office (MDA/IP) represents the Israeli program in developing assessment plans. MDA/IP is responsible for providing assessment plans regarding Arrow Weapon System (AWS) interoperability requirements for interfacing to the U.S. BMDS. MDA/DE is responsible for providing assessment plans for BMD systems to interface with AWS. MDA/DE interfaces directly with all other international programs, as required.

2.5.4 MDA Cybersecurity

The Office of the Chief Information Officer (MDA/IC) is responsible for assessing BMDS Cybersecurity. To accomplish this, MDA/IC and MDA/DE, working with the operational community, are executing a Cybersecurity assessment strategy that leverages both subsystem and system-level data. Cybersecurity assessment is an ongoing activity not necessarily tied to any specific BMDS incremental delivery. The goal of this assessment is to determine the ability of integrated BMDS to protect, detect, and react to cyber-attacks, and restore and sustain mission operations in a cyber-contested environment.

2.5.5 MDA Quality and Safety

Programs and subsystems within the BMDS employ multiple MIL-STD-882E tasks to assess the safety of the BMDS. Based on the technologies present in the BMDS, the Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA) identifies general hazards which would be expected and require risk management. The Subsystem Hazard Analysis (SSHA) and the System Hazard Analysis (SHA) are used to assess and document the degree to which the generic hazards identified in the PHA have been mitigated by system design and hazards that are still present in the system.

Additionally, the Safety Requirement Criticality Analysis (SR/CA) is used to ensure that the appropriate safety requirements are in place to mitigate hazards to an acceptable level of risk.

2-7

At the BMDS-level, the PHA addresses those hazards which arise from the interoperability of subsystems. An SHA and SR/CA are also performed for the overall BMDS. These analyses draw on the safety analyses performed at the subsystem-level.

Whenever a residual risk (a hazard that has not been adequately mitigated) is discovered at either the subsystem or the BMDS-level, a Safety Risk Assessment (SRA) is performed. The SRA documents the level of safety risk (based on severity and probability) associated with the hazard.

The SRAs may also contain recommendations for mitigating or eliminating the hazard. The risk, as well as any recommendations for correcting the hazard, must be accepted at the appropriate level of authority as prescribed by the MDA Assurance Provisions.

To ensure the SRA recommendations are included in MDA test planning, the assessment requirements for the SRA are developed through the IMAP process. Because SRA assessment requirements refer to system safety risks with baseline BMDS capability, mitigation or resolution plans are implemented at the earliest opportunity and are included in the BMD System Specification (BMD SS) as requirements for the system. These system risks are referenced for verification in the near term BMDS assessment plans. Supplemental information can be found in section 3.14 of the Missile Defense Agency Assurance Provisions (MAP) document.

2.5.6 Warfighter

The Warfighter leverages BMDS tests and exercises to improve confidence in BMDS capabilities and obtain the knowledge required for operational acceptance of BMDS incremental deliveries. The knowledge gained in these events aids the Warfighter in developing and refining necessary TTPs. It also facilitates development and refinement of CCMD Concept Plans (CONPLANs) and OPLANs. BMDS test campaigns employing accredited M&S provide credible BMDS performance data to help the Warfighter understand how to translate RDT&E assets into operational realities. A suite of accredited BMDS M&S also increases Warfighter confidence in overall BMDS capabilities and helps quantify the role and contribution of the technical capabilities with respect to the operational BMD mission.

Warfighter participation in the IMAP process is critical. The operational assessment function of the IMAP process is to capture the associated assessment requirements and to ensure the required data is collected and delivered to the organizations conducting the operational assessments.

Execution of the IMAP process facilitates completion of the DOT&E Annual Report, BMDS OTA operational assessments, USSTRATCOM’s GIAMDA annual report, and their operational acceptance of new BMDS capabilities.

2.5.7 Operational Test Agency

The BMDS OTA Team provides a capability-based BMDS operational assessment against threat ballistic missiles of all ranges and in all phases of flight (i.e., boost, ascent, midcourse, and terminal). The OTA assessment process describes BMDS capabilities, supports decision-making at any time, and facilitates program adjustments to fill data voids. The BMDS OTA Team

2-8 documents, in the Operational Assessment Report (OAR) and its rolling assessments, observed performance during developmental and operational test events, focusing on operational employment considerations. An overarching set of critical BMD functions, in terms of the required capabilities of a BMDS weapon system to support a CCMD Area of Responsibility (AOR), frame this assessment. The approach to evaluate OT&E of major BMDS capabilities being fielded are documented in an Operational Test and Evaluation Plan, which includes Warfighter Assess-To-Criteria (when available).The BMDS OTA Team prepares an assessment of the operational effectiveness, suitability, survivability, and interoperability of the BMDS in an integrated DT/OT environment. The BMDS OTA Team provides an early and synergistic assessment of operational performance (effectiveness plus the suitability measures of mission reliability and operational availability), to increase risk mitigation and reduce overall test scope.

The supportability portion of the suitability assessment identifies the strengths and weaknesses of the logistical support. Interoperability focuses on compatibility, integration, and interoperability of the subsystems. A rolling Operational Assessment is conducted after each test event to assess the current BMDS capability and a formal OAR is delivered after each major phase delivery (e.g., EPAA Ph 2) has been tested and evaluated.

3-1

3 MDA ASSESSMENT PLANNING

The IMAP Volume II documents the plan for assessing BMDS incremental deliveries across the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP). Execution of the IMAP produces the objective evidence needed to change the OCB and operationally accept BMDS deliveries into the fielded BMDS. As shown in Figure 3-1, the IMAP process integrates information captured in the TBL together with operational employment considerations to produce the set of questions that must be answered to support development and operational decisions to deliver BMDS increments. The IMAP Volume II provides summary-level information to characterize the primary assessment intent for each BMDS incremental delivery and provides IMTP planners a top-level understanding on the objectives and scope of Ground Tests (GTs) specifically aligned to incremental delivery. Volume II is also the basis for the detailed planning that produces assessment requirements, which in turn are used by test planners to develop test objectives that are reflected in IMTP Test Configuration Sheets (TCSs) and to produce the Test Objective Memorandum (TO Memo) associated with each appropriate IMTP planned test event.

Figure 3-1 - Assessment Planning Process

The IMAP planning starts with capturing the top level objectives (questions) of BMDS assessors in the context of the decisions related to delivering BMDS incremental deliveries across the FYDP. It ensures that all assessment stakeholders have a shared view on the expected impact of those deliveries and enables initial definition of the tests and tests infrastructure needed to

3-2 produce the objective evidence in support of associated decisions. This chapter describes the attributes of the IMAP planning that are the basis of IMAP Volume II content.

3.1 Technical Content

The MIP documents the alignment of content, as reflected in the BMDS technical baseline, to Element delivered builds. The MIP also documents the schedule for integrating Element builds into the BMDS, including Service managed builds. System-level assessment ensures that delivered technical content captured in the MIP and further described in the BMD SDD and BMD SS functions as intended and meets design intent. Design intent is defined by desired operational outcome. For Service managed capability deliveries that impact BMDS performance and contain technical content not captured in the BMD SDD and SS (e.g., Space-Based Infrared System (SBIRS), Cobra Dane Upgrade/Upgraded Early Warning Radar (CDU/UEWR), and Phased Array Tracking Radar Intercept on Target (PATRIOT)), MDA determines what must be assessed at the system level through direct coordination with the Service managed program office.

3.2 Assessment Considerations

BMDS Elements are deployed to US European Command (USEUCOM), US Central Command (USCENTCOM), US Pacific Command (USPACOM), and US Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) in support of their theater/regional and/or strategic BMD missions. The design intent behind BMDS incremental deliveries must be assessed in the context of the CCMDs in which those deliveries are fielded or impact mission execution. The IMAP maps BMDS deliveries to each CCMD that will employ the associated capability to ensure assessment planning accounts for CCMD dependent considerations that must be factored into assessment.

This is especially important in cases where operational acceptance of a BMDS delivery cannot occur without CCMD unique objective evidence.

Threat is an integral part of BMDS development. Thus, assessment planning must consider differences in the threats that must be defeated, which varies by CCMD and their associated missions. Threat considerations begin with the parametric threat space allocated to an Element by the BMD SS. The specific threats contained in the BMD SS represent instances of the threat space against which the BMDS Elements must respond. For each BMDS increment, the IMAP calls out the set of threats allocated to a BMDS Element for the first time (in that increment).

The intent in doing so is to ensure that the associated assessment maintains perspective on that set of threats in executing detail assessment requirements planning. Additionally, the TBL specifically calls out a subset of these threats that must be assessed at the system level to support delivery decisions. The IMAP also makes it clear which of the listed threats are considered operational by the intelligence community and which are developmental/conceptual.

Developmental/conceptual threats are captured to ensure compliance with BMD SS requirements and characterize BMDS capability against continually evolving BMD threats.

3-3

Periodic BMDS Planning Exercises (PLANEXs) are executed to provide greater detail with regard to a CCMD’s employment of BMDS capability. The PLANEX is executed with a specific timeframe in mind and considers the impact of BMDS incremental deliveries on the fielded BMDS, in defense of critical assets against specific threats, to develop a Blue Force Defense Design (BFDD) that will be the foundation of all test cases constructed to support assessment. Specifically, a PLANEX considers:

New / upgraded BMDS builds by increment capabilities;

Adversary ballistic missile systems (Missile Order of Battle), Ballistic Missile Operating

Areas (BMOAs), and Enemy Courses of Actions (ECOAs);

Critical assets the BMDS must defend;

Blue Force Defense Design (BFDD) (e.g., asset physical locations, weapon loadouts, sensor orientation (boresight));

CCMD Area Air Defense Plans (AADP), TTP, Pre-Planned Responses (PPRs);

Gray Force participation including joint operational doctrine, TTP and interoperability.

3.3 Top Level Objectives (TLOs)

Top Level Objectives (TLOs) are developed taking into account technical content and operational considerations described in Sections 3.1 and 3.2. These objectives are stated as questions that must be answered in order to make decisions regarding BMDS incremental deliveries and operational acceptance of those deliveries, as well as other developmental and operational decisions not specifically aligned to BMDS incremental deliveries. Regardless of the specific decision an assessment is targeted to support, assessment is generally related to addressing some aspect of three fundamental questions:

Did MDA build what MDA intended to build? (Requirements Verification) Did what MDA build achieve what MDA intended it to achieve? (Developmental

Assessment) Does the delivered BMDS capability improve BMD operational capability? (Operational

Assessment)

BMD SS requirements are allocated to BMDS Elements and they have primary responsibility for ensuring requirements are verified. Elements may need data from a system-level test to execute requirements verification and thus would generate a TLO for this purpose. However, TLOs are primarily developed in support of developmental and operational decisions to address the second and third questions listed previously and reflect what an assessment must address to support decisions. They are the basis for developing detailed plans and assessment requirements that capture how the TLOs will be answered. MDA TLOs are explicitly captured in the IMAP Volume II. Operational objectives are included in the IMAP Volume II, as required, to ensure that the needs of the operational community are met through the IMTP documented test program.

The IMAP planning process captures assessment requirements for both the Technical and Operational Assessments to efficiently drive M&S development and BMDS testing and analysis.

The planning process ensures that assessment requirements are captured in the START database

3-4 and they address all data that must be delivered from test and analysis venues to support the BMDS assessment community as a whole. The process also documents the rationale for each assessment requirement and the conditions under which the required data must be collected.

Figure 3-2 - IMAP Stakeholder Assessment Requirement Development

All assessors who require data from system-level ground test and digital M&S events must accurately capture assessment requirements to ensure that needed testing and analysis is planned and executed and that needed M&S capability is identified and developed. As shown in Figure 3-2, there are three key considerations when defining an assessment requirement: 1) Assessment Objectives, 2) Assessment Conditions, and 3) Assessment Data Sources. Appendix D provides a detailed description of assessment requirement development.

3.4 Decisions

The IMAP process is focused on assessing incremental BMDS deliveries and their impact on the capabilities and limitations of the fielded BMDS, in support of OCB decisions. The IMAP Volume II captures the decisions that are explicitly supported within each increment, the timeframe of the assessment supporting each decision, and the TLOs that must be addressed to inform each decision. Additionally, assessment requirements are mapped to each decision as they are developed. Assessment requirements become more mature over time and are generally developed within two years of the actual assessment.

To enable a full characterization of BMDS capabilities and limitations, the IMAP also captures recurring assessments that must be executed, regardless of the explicit decisions inherent to a BMDS incremental delivery. These assessments may have specific TLOs and associated

3-5 assessment requirements. BMDS capabilities and limitations are used by developmental and operational stakeholders in support of decisions regarding future BMDS development and the manner in which the fielded BMDS is employed. These decisions are dependent on the results of assessment, and therefore cannot be explicitly called out during assessment planning.

3.5 Establishing Assessment Priorities

Assessment priorities are directly traced to the decisions supported. In the context of BMDS incremental deliveries, all associated explicit decisions must be supported. Each BMDS increment, per the BMD SDD, has a defined focus area (e.g., Increment 2 contains European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) Phase 2). In general, assessment requirements in support of decisions associated with the defined focus area is by definition the number one priority;

assessment requirements in support of all other decisions associated with an increment is the number two priority. This distinction in priority is intended to aid planners, especially when resources are constrained. The end goal is for both priority one and two decisions to be fully supported. In general, any assessment requirements not tied explicitly to a decision is given priority three. This prioritization scheme applies to ground tests captured in the IMTP that are primarily targeted for assessing BMDS incremental deliveries3. The prioritization scheme recognizes that these tests also provide a data collection opportunity to support recurring assessments targeted at better characterizing BMDS capabilities and limitations.

3.6 IMAP Approval

The IMAP requires assessment stakeholder concurrence in that it documents the top level plan driving the IMTP for ground test and digital M&S events. The IMAP is vetted through the Assessment Integrated Product Team (AIPT) and will be brought to the Systems Engineering and Integration Council (SEIC) for final approval.

3 IMTP ground tests are also executed to address specific operational requirements. These tests are very focused in nature with limited capacity to address requirements outside the primary objective of the test. Prioritization of assessment requirements levied on these tests will be accomplished in conjunction with event planning.

3-6

4-1

4 ASSESSMENT DRIVEN GROUND TEST PLANNING

The purpose of conducting tests is to collect data in support of systems engineering and to enable BMDS developmental and operational assessment. The BMDS assessment depends on the compilation, synthesis, and evaluation of data from multiple sources, including data and analysis products generated from test events, digital system-level M&S, and subsystem M&S. Objective evidence gathered from these sources is essential input for assessment that supports developmental and operational decisions, and enables characterization of BMDS capabilities and limitations. Although assessment requirements can be allocated to any venue captured in the BMDS Integrated Master Test Plan (IMTP), BMDS assessment predominately relies on ground test and M&S events to produce data required to support BMDS incremental delivery and operational acceptance. This chapter summarizes the relationship between ground test planning and the IMAP process.

4.1 Integrated Master Test Plan (IMTP)

The IMTP is the overarching plan for BMDS testing, and all MDA system level tests are reflected in the IMTP. As with the IMAP, the IMTP spans the FYDP. Each test event described in the IMTP is summarized in a TCS, which provides an executive level summary of what the referenced test will address.

Figure 4-1 - IMAP Driven Strategic Test Planning

The IMAP and products of the IMAP process are the primary drivers for the IMTP ground test program. Figure 4-1 depicts the general relationship between the IMAP, IMAP driven assessment requirements, and the IMTP. IMAP Volume II captures the TLOs that must be

4-2 addressed to support decisions and characterize capabilities and limitations for each BMDS incremental delivery. Assessment requirements describe in detail how the TLOs will be answered by specifying assessment objectives/ assessment sub-objectives (AOs/ASOs), measures, conditions, and Key Test Points (KTPs). The IMAP, together with the assessment requirements, are the basis for test objectives and test resource requirements captured for each ground test planned to support BMDS incremental delivery.

4.1.1 Test Objectives

Test objectives define the purpose of the test and become the primary determinant of an event’s success or failure. Test objectives drive the data to be collected and analyzed to support the assessment requirements, ultimately leading to an informed decision. Test objectives are included in TCSs and drive the event design.

For near-term BMDS increments delivered within the first two years of the FYDP, assessment requirements will be fully defined with direct traceability to test objectives. For BMDS increments delivered beyond the first two years, assessment requirements will be under development. Test objectives associated with these increments will be derived from the IMAP TLOs, assessment requirements and associated planning considerations. Test objectives will be continually refined as assessment requirements mature and additional detail becomes available.

4.1.2 Resource Requirements

Test resource requirements, or Test Requirements (TRs), define the Blue Force assets, quantity, and software versions needed to meet test objectives, threat requirements, test infrastructure requirements, and specialized requirements for a test event. TRs support strategic test planning by informing the IMTP test designers of what is needed to resource and cost the test event.

Element deliveries mapped to each CCMD in IMAP Volume II will be the starting point for determining test configuration and identifying required test resources. This will support resource planning for BMDS assets located at fixed geographic locations; however, determining the TRs for mobile weapons (i.e., PATRIOT, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), and Aegis Ships) will take additional planning, especially when assessment requirements are not fully developed. The MDA Systems Engineering Directorate, working with the Elements and operational community, will provide an initial estimate on the number of mobile weapons that must be represented in a given test. This estimate will be based on the decisions supported, the BMDS functionality delivered, and the operational context in which the delivery must be assessed. TRs will additionally draw upon information documented in defense designs as part of the Consolidated PLANEX to determine Blue Force projections.

4.2 Test Event Planning and Execution

The goal of assessment driven test planning is…