Enabling Freedom of Maneuver in the EMOE

Modernizing the 25E

By Sgt. Maj. Nicholas A. Perez-Santalla U.S. Army Forces Command

Article published on: September 1, 2025, in the September 2025 Edition

Read Time: < 8 mins

Earlier this year, I had the honor of leading the Fiscal Year 2025 (FY25) 25E Critical Task Site Selection Board (CTSSB). For those of us in the military occupational specialty (MOS), this was not just a routine review of tasks; it was a chance to reimagine how our Soldiers manage and maneuver within one of the most contested environments in modern warfare: the electromagnetic operational environment (EMOE).

What made this board truly impactful was the range of expertise at the table. This was the first hybrid CTSSB where we were able to bring together 25Es from across the active Army, National Guard, and Reserve components, as well as major commands like Army service component commands, corps, divisions, and Security Force Assistance Command. These were not just participants; they were seasoned leaders who have operated across the full spectrum of conflict.

The discussions we had were frank, sometimes tough, but always grounded in the reality of today’s operational demands. We were not just thinking about frequency assignments anymore. We were wrestling with how our MOS must evolve to support distributed operations, joint integration, and emerging threats, particularly those posed by near peer adversaries that are actively trying to deny us the very spectrum we depend on.

Shifting Role of the 25E

In recent years, the EMOE has transformed from a largely technical concern into a critical element of military operations. It’s no longer just about managing radio frequencies or issuing assignments. The EMOE has become a contested, congested, and dynamic environment that affects everything from precession fires; position, navigation and timing (PNT); unmanned aerial systems (UAS), and mission command. As adversaries invest heavily in electromagnetic warfare (EW) and spectrum denial capabilities, the Army must ensure it has the expertise and infrastructure to not just operate, but maneuver freely within the EMOE. That is where the 25E comes in.

The role of the 25E spectrum manager has expanded significantly. Today, these NCOs must be ready to support electromagnetic attack (EA), coordinate closely with cyber and intelligence teams, understand direction finding techniques, resolve interference, and align efforts with joint, interagency, and multinational partners.

These are not optional skills; they are mission critical. And they require seamless integration with targeting, maneuver, cyber, and command and control elements. As laid out in Joint Publication (JP) 3-85, the modern 25E must be an enabler across all warfighting functions (WfF). This shift is not abstract. When we talk about long-range precession fires, we talk about systems that depend on uninterrupted spectrum access for both guidance and targeting. When we deploy future vertical lift platforms, we’re relying on secure spectrum links for navigation and data sharing. And when we execute distributed operations under Army 2030, we are fundamentally depending on spectrum continuity to maintain synchronization and tempo.

Building Operational Readiness

When we convened the FY25 CTSSB, our purpose was clear: ensure the 25E MOS remains aligned with the realities of modern warfare. That meant updating our tasks to reflect operational demands; not just in theory, but in practice.

One of the biggest recommended additions we made was a task focused on supporting EA requests within the Continental United States (CONUS) and U.S. territories and possessions. This is not something we can treat as an afterthought. The rise in threats to domestic infrastructure, both from malicious actors and unintended interference, makes it essential for spectrum professionals to be ready here at home, not just overseas. This requires close coordination with civilian authorities like the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), as well as Army installations. It is grounded in regulations such as Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Manual (CJCSM) 3320.01D and Army Techniques Publication (ATP) 6-02.70.

Our responsibility to the operational force is to clearly define ownership of spectrum requirement coordination, from the maneuver battalion level to the Pentagon, and to formalize this ownership through this task and other authoritative efforts. This eliminates processing time, confusion, and combat service support to enable realistic training at home station across the Army.

We also refined our focus on joint interoperability. The EMOE does not stop at Army lines. 25Es must be capable of working alongside their counterparts in the Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Space Force and allied forces. That means aligning with joint doctrine – specifically JP 6-0 and understanding how to integrate into joint and combined staff operations. Interoperability is not just a buzzword; it’s the difference between synchronized fires or fractured effects. Part of our effort involved taking a serious look at emerging tools.

We received briefings on systems like the Electromagnetic Warfare Planning and Management Tool (EWPMT) and the Spectrum Situational Awareness System (S2AS) from Army Futures Command (AFC) Army Capability Manager- Electromagnetic Warfare (ACM-EW). These tools are not perfect yet, but they are the future. Being part of the development without 17-series counterparts is crucial to providing shared understanding of the EMOE.

Collaboration Is Combat Power

One of the most important themes that came out of this year’s CTSSB was the need to embed the 25E deeper into operational planning – not just in G6 shops, but across the staff. That means making sure spectrum managers are in the room when decisions are made about maneuver, intelligence, fires, and cyber. EMOE considerations cannot be bolted on after the fact. They must be integrated from the start. To do this effectively, 25Es need to understand how to speak across warfighting functions. That includes working closely with signal intelligence (SIGINT) analysts, targeting and cyber planners, and even legal advisors to ensure compliance with international rules and authorities. This cross-functional approach is already happening throughout strategic headquarters. It is time we brought that same mindset into planning and training across all echelons.

We also addressed one of the cultural challenges inside the MOS: the perception that 25Es operate in isolation or are solely responsible for frequency assignments. That view is outdated. Today’s 25Es are operational enablers who contribute directly to mission success. The CTSSB placed emphasis on doctrinal alignment and standardized tasks to ensure 25Es can operate confidently at all echelons, from the tactical edge to strategic level planning.

This collaboration also extends to our counterparts in the 17-series Career Management Field (CMF), whose expertise in cyber operations and EW compliments the spectrum focused role of the 25E. Many 25Es today operate directly within G3 Cyber Electromagnetic Activities (CEMA) sections, where they work side by side with cyber professionals to synchronize effects across the EMOE. This integration reflects the Army’s recognition that spectrum dominance cannot be achieved in isolation – it requires persistent, coordinated action across the cyber, intelligence, and electromagnetic spectrum communities.

Strengthening the NCO Corps in 25E

Something we cannot afford to overlook is that the 25E MOS is made up entirely of NCOs. That is both a strength and a responsibility. We often emphasize the technical expertise required in this field, and rightly so; however, leadership must remain at the core of everything we do.

A strong spectrum manager is not just a good technician; they’re a team leader, a mentor, a trainer, and a standard bearer. During the CTSSB, we reinforced this by incorporating leadership expectations into how tasks were written and evaluated. We also discussed improving professional development pathways, including increasing access to NCO Education System (NCOES) opportunities and embedding leadership challenges at unit level training events.

Maybe most importantly, we emphasized the 25E’s role as an educator. Whether briefing a commander on EMOE vulnerabilities or explaining interference risks to junior Soldiers, 25Es must be ready to teach, coach, and mentor. That demands more than technical skill; it requires confidence, clarity, and the ability to translate complexity into actionable insight. It also requires time management, because none of this replaces the core NCO duties of counseling, discipline, and Soldier care.

Building a “Future Ready” 25E Force

The 2025 CTSSB was not just an administrative update; it was a deliberate effort to position the 25E MOS for the future fight, whatever that might be. We grounded our recommendations in doctrine and pushed ourselves to think operationally, anticipate threats, and invest in the leadership and tools our NCOs need to thrive in a contested EMOE. That future will not be easy.

The EMOE is constantly shifting, congested by commercial use, contested or denied by near-peer adversaries, and shaped by emerging technologies. Our Soldiers will face jamming, spoofing, surveillance, and cyber-physical threats, but if we train them right and equip them with the mindset and mission understanding, they will not only survive… they will dominate. This will require more than updates to training manuals, critical tasks, or equipment lists. It will require a cultural shift. We must foster a corps of 25Es who are not only technically proficient, but also agile, proactive, and deeply engaged with the broader mission. That means encouraging innovation, sharing best practices, and staying in tune with the evolution of joint and interagency electromagnetic spectrum operations (EMSO).

In the end, our goal is not simply to manage the EMOE; it is to exploit it. We must shape it in ways that enable freedom of maneuver and allow our EW counterparts to deny it from our adversaries. To do that, we need leaders. We need mentors. We need warfighters in the truest sense who just happen to be experts in one of the most complex and consequential environments on today’s battlefield.