THE FUTURE OF THE ARMY
Futurearmy
Futurearmy
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
APPENDIX B:<br />
RECOMMENDATIONS BY RESPONSIBLE <strong>OF</strong>FICIAL<br />
Recommendation 53: The Secretary of the Army should<br />
perform a top-to-bottom review in fiscal year 2017 of the<br />
Individual Ready Reserve program to ensure compliance with<br />
existing statutes.<br />
Recommendation 56: The Secretary of the Army should<br />
rescind the February 22, 2006, memo Individual Ready Reserve<br />
Transformation.<br />
Recommendation 57: Congress, the Department of Defense,<br />
and the Army should implement the Commission’s plan<br />
(Option Three) for distribution of the Apache fleet. The<br />
Commission’s plan maintains twenty-four manned Apache<br />
battalions including twenty in the Regular Army equipped<br />
with twenty-four aircraft each and four in the Army National<br />
Guard equipped with eighteen aircraft each. The plan adds only<br />
two Black Hawk battalions to the Army National Guard. The<br />
Army should commit to using the four Army National Guard<br />
Apache battalions regularly, mobilizing and deploying them in<br />
peacetime and war.<br />
Recommendation 58: The Army should maintain a forwardstationed<br />
Combat Aviation Brigade in Korea.<br />
Recommendation 59: The Army should consider increasing<br />
flying hours available for peacetime training.<br />
Recommendation 60: The Army should implement a more<br />
aggressive modernization program for its aviation forces.<br />
Recommendation 61: The Secretary of the Army should<br />
codify the delegation of authority from the Chief, National<br />
Guard Bureau to the Director, Army National Guard in Army<br />
regulations for force structure allocation among the states,<br />
territories, and the District of Columbia.<br />
Recommendation 62: The Secretary of the Army should<br />
codify in Army regulations the existing Army National Guard<br />
Force Program Review process as the formal way to manage<br />
change in the Army National Guard.<br />
Recommendation 63: The Army should add representatives<br />
from the Army Secretariat and Army Staff to the Army<br />
National Guard Force Program Review working groups and<br />
boards as observers.<br />
<strong>ARMY</strong> SERVICE COMPONENT COMMANDS<br />
Recommendation 10: The Army must assist Combatant<br />
Commands and Army Service Component Commands with<br />
timely integration of force structure changes into their strategic<br />
planning process.<br />
Recommendation 11: Combatant Commands and Army<br />
Service Component Commands must update all war plans<br />
with current and programmed force structure and doctrine and<br />
establish a process to ensure routine war plan and Time Phased<br />
Force Deployment Data updates at a minimum of once every<br />
two years.<br />
Recommendation 19: The Army should ensure Combatant<br />
Commands (COCOM) and Army Service Component<br />
Commands (ASCC) have the ability to provide operational<br />
mission command in proportion to the unique mission for each<br />
COCOM. The Army should consult closely with COCOM<br />
and ASCC commanders to assess the risks entailed in mission<br />
command changes and seek to minimize risk where possible<br />
when implementing them.<br />
National Commission on the Future of the Army 117