Military

Final Evaluation Problem (FEP)

The Final Evaluation Problem is the third command assessment conducted by the ISIC that determines a unit's readiness to proceed to the intermediate and advanced phases of the IDTC.

The FEP is conducted subsequent to the TSTA III and is intended to demonstrate the ship's ability to conduct multiple simultaneous combat missions and support functions and to survive complex casualty control situations under stressful conditions as well as demonstrate a capability to deploy. This phase may also be used to accomplish requisite qualifications not acquired during TSTA.

Because each ship executes a unique TSTA process that is driven by a variety of variables (residual crew proficiency, CART II performance, TSTA performance, nature of upcoming deployment, OPSKED perturbations, etc.) it is more realistic and efficient to develop a FEP syllabus tailored to each ship's requirements than to have a standard package. Direct oversight and active participation in the work-up process places the ISIC in the best position to define the appropriate combination and sequence of FEP evolutions/drills. Previous demonstration of the capacity to perform multiple simultaneous mission areas under stressful conditions should be considered in determining the scope and duration of FEP.

ATGS (LANT and PAC) provide CART II scenario packages to ships in all fleet concentration areas as they begin the basic phase, during the shipboard training team (SBTT) course. Copies are also provided to the ISIC and ship's training liaison officer (TLO) (at the regional ATG). Other scenarios (i.e., warfare area specific or aor/mission specific) are made available as needed throughout the IDTC.

Scenario packages include: (1) an unclassified scenario notebook (paper and disk); (2) a classified disk with the bftt digital scenario; (3) a classified disk with the cmtpc digital scenario, OPTASK supps, ROE, I&W ideas, digital maps; (4) unclassified GCCS overlays on a 4mm DAT tape (LANT only); and (5) other material for ITT use in CART II, TSTA, CMTQ, and FEP. The scenario notebook contains: geopolitical information, scripted geography data, order of battle info, problem control info for CART II and FEP, drill imposition information, CMTQ information and groundtruth. ATGLANT provides a general suggested CART II, CMTQ, and FEP timeline (schedule of events). ATGPAC provides a detailed actual CART II and FEP timeline.

Scenario library includes: (1) ship class specific CART II scenarios for CG, DDG, DD, FFG, LHA/LHD, LPD, LSD, AOE, MCS, MCM, MHC, CV/N; (2) location/AOR specific scenarios for East Med, Adriatic, AG/NAS, Baltops, UNITAS, CD-ops; and (3) MIW scenarios for Westpac, SWA, etc. There are currently six Acts scenarios converted to BFTT format not all scenarios are available at both ATGS.

During the SBTT ITT lab, scenarios are discussed in detail (how to maintain groundtruth, problem control procedures, facilitated editing of scenarios, timeline construction, drill imposition, etc.). Preliminary tailoring for ship- or ISIC-specific requirements is accomplished before the scenario package is delivered to the ship. Final scenario modifications are conducted by the ship after the SBTT. The ATGS consolidate drill guide packages using a standard drill guide format. There is a library of ship class- specific scenario drill guides to supplement the current and future scenarios as they are developed.

Forward-Deployed Naval Force FEPs are designed by the ISIC, with ATG WESTPAC support, and conducted at not-to-exceed 30-month intervals.

FEP results will be reported by the ISIC at the end of Basic Phase Training by a simple message report stating the date FEP was completed and that the ship is ready to proceed to intermediate and advanced training. ISIC will indicate if there are any deficiencies that require remedial action and planned course to correct.

Following the successful completion of the TSTA III/FEP underway period, and with ISIC concurrence, the CV/CVN will gain equivalency credit for the following FXP exercises based on battle problem scenario: