ATTACH 7B.1..pdf

Air Force Civil Engineer Center

Encroachment Management Playbook

Published: April 2016

2 | P a g e

Table of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1 Purpose

1.2 Scope

1.3 Description

1.4 AFEM Framework

Chapter 2 Organize

2.1 Guidance and Leadership Involvement

2.1.1 Roles and Responsibilities

2.1.2 Stakeholders

2.2 Stand up the IEMT

2.2.1 Charter

2.2.2 Meetings

2.2.3 Issue Elevation

2.2.4 Schedule

2.2.4.1 Agenda

2.2.4.2 Formal Minutes

2.2.5 Training (AFEM Training Home Page)

2.2.6 PSUs

2.3 Installation Complex/Mission Footprint (IC/MF)

2.3.1 Installation Complex (IC)

2.3.2 Mission Footprint (MF)

2.3.3 Region of Influence (ROI)

2.3.4 Priority Region of Influence (PROI)

Chapter 3 Assess

3.1 Encroachment Studies

3.2 ICEMAP

3.2.1 Internal ICEMAP

3.2.2 External ICEMAP

3.2.3 Compatible Land Use Strategy (CLUS)

3.3 Foundational/Legacy Programs

3.3.1 Joint Land Use Study (JLUS)

3.3.2 Air Installations Compatible Use Zones (AICUZ)

3.4 Stakeholders

3.4.1 Internal Stakeholders

3.4.2 External Stakeholders

Chapter 4 Act

4.1 IEMT Functions

4.1.1 Encroachment Challenges and Management Actions

4.1.2 The Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR)

4.2 Annual Report

4.3 Issue Elevation

4.4 Stakeholder Engagement

4.4.1 Engagement Preparation

4.4.2 Cross-Functional Engagement

4.5 Mitigating Encroachment Challenges

4.5.1 Non-Real Estate Actions (Collaborating with Local and State Government)

4.5.2 Real Estate Actions

3 | P a g e

Chapter 5 Monitor

5.1 IEMT Responsibilities

5.1.1 Meetings

5.1.2 Management Actions

5.2 Situational Awareness of IC/MF Encroachment Management

5.2.1 IC/MF Map

5.2.2 Mission Requirements

5.2.3 Media and Legislative Monitoring

5.2.3.1 Media Monitoring

5.2.3.2 Legislative Monitoring

5.3 Monitor Development

5.3.1 Local Trends

5.3.2 Land Use Plans

5.3.3 Political Environment

5.3.4 Stakeholder Matrix

Appendix

Appendix A - Acronyms Appendix B - Glossary of Terms Appendix C - References Appendix D - ICEMAP and Encroachment Challenge Areas

Airspace and Land Restrictions Airborne Noise Urban Growth Spectrum Encroachment Endangered Species and Critical Habitat Air Water Cultural Resources Unexploded Ordnance and Munitions Marine Resources Energy Compatibility and Availability Security/Safety Natural Factors and Climate Effects

Appendix E - AFEM Foundational Programs AFEM Foundational Programs Air Installations Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) Program Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) Installation Development Plan (IDP) Airspace Management Programs

Obstruction Evaluation/Airport Airspace Analysis (OE/AAA) Program Mission Compatibility Evaluation (MCE) Process Environmental Programs

Natural Resources Management Cultural Resources Management Air Quality Compliance and Resource Management Program

Range Management

4 | P a g e

Operational Range Assessment Program (ORAP) Comprehensive Range Plan (CRP)

Antiterrorism (AT) Programs Installation Vulnerability Assessments

Communications Programs Air Force Spectrum Interference Resolution (AFSIR) Program

Appendix F - Master List of Links Appendix G - Reach Back Appendix H - Example of a Successful REPI Project

Figures

Figure 1-1 AFEM Framework Figure 2-1 IC/MF Notional Map Figure 2-2 ROI for USAFA Figure 2-3 ROI and PROI Figure 3-1 CLUS Process Figure 4-1 IEMT Functions Figure 4-2 Notional Management Actions Figure 4-3 Elevating Encroachment Issues Review Figure 4-4 Stakeholder Engagement Strategy Figure 4-5 IEMT Internal/External Engagement Figure 4-6 Rules of Engagement Figure 4-7 Tools to Mitigate Encroachment Challenges Figure 5-1 Monitoring Activities

Tables Table 2-1 Roles and Responsibilities Table 2-2 IEMT Augmentees Table 2-3 Notional External Stakeholders Table 2-4 Region of Influence Table 3-1 Foundational Programs

5 | P a g e

Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1 Purpose

The purpose of the Air Force Encroachment Management (AFEM) Playbook is to educate and assist encroachment stakeholders on how to implement the AFEM Program. This playbook is intended to be a supplement to existing regulations, guidance and policies. In addition, this playbook provides charts and graphics to help the reader visualize the ongoing, cyclical nature of AFEM.

1.2 Scope

The intended audience of this playbook is the Installation Encroachment Management Team (IEMT). Although the AFEM Program touches all AF echelons, the installation is the ‘front-line’ to address and mitigate encroachment challenges. The goal of this playbook is to inform and guide the IEMT how to implement the AFEM Program. IEMT roles and responsibilities are broken down into four elements that comprise the AFEM Framework: Organize, Assess, Act and Monitor. This playbook will define and clarify the roles, responsibilities and actions required by the IEMT.

This playbook pulls together existing resources available on the AFEM SharePoint, and Air Force Instructions (AFI), Desk References, Computer-Based Training (CBT) and Job Aids. Any member of the IEMT should be able to quickly navigate and find applicable guidance to complete key AFEM business processes.

1.3 Description

AFEM uses a systematic approach to identify and address encroachment challenges. Each AF installation is a system comprised of smaller system components (e.g., airfield, transportation and utility systems). Other associated systems exist outside the fence lines that are critical to successful execution of the installation mission; these include airspace, ranges, and other geographically separate facilities and sites (e.g., missile fields, radar relays and drop zones).

Together, these assets comprise the larger system called the Installation Complex (IC). Each component of the IC is essential to accomplish the mission. Additionally, units at one location may routinely require the use of facilities, ranges and airspace associated with another installation or another Service. These other routinely used assets are called the Mission Footprint (MF). The combined IC/MF defines the geographic area that must be monitored for encroachment. The IC may be defined differently for overseas installations, based on bi-lateral agreements. Installations should contact their Major Command (MAJCOM) Encroachment Management Team (EMT) for more information, if needed.

1.4 AFEM Framework

This playbook is organized around the AFEM Framework that is designed to support a cross-functional, cyclical and integrated approach to encroachment management. The four elements of the AFEM Framework are:

1. Organize: Creates the structure and scope for the AFEM Program at all AF echelons.

2. Assess: Develops and maintains enterprise-wide knowledge of the 13 encroachment and sustainment challenge areas.

3. Act: Implements AFEM actions and strategies to achieve identified goals.

6 | P a g e

4. Monitor: Provides continuous situational awareness of encroachment and sustainment challenges.

Figure 1-1 describes the overall process of AFEM Framework.

Figure 1-1 AFEM Framework

7 | P a g e

Chapter 2 Organize The Organize element of the AFEM Framework creates the structure and scope critical to the program’s success. The Organize section of the AFEM Program consists of the following four components:

≠ Leadership Involvement ≠ Cross-Functional IEMT ≠ Elevating Issues

≠ IC/MF

2.1 Guidance and Leadership Involvement

The success of the AFEM Program is dependent on proactive and sustained involvement of leadership. AF leadership at Headquarters Air Force (HAF), MAJCOM/Direct Reporting Unit (DRU), Primary Subordinate Unit (PSU) and installation levels must maintain situational awareness of the mission and community impacts to address encroachment and sustainment challenges.

2.1.1 Roles and Responsibilities

Table 2-1 shows a list of key roles and responsibilities required by AFI 90-2001 and managed at the installation level. The complete list of AFEM roles and responsibilities for IEMT members is found in Chapter 2, Section 2.29 of AFI 90-2001, Encroachment Management.

Role Responsibility

Installation Commander

≠ Implement the AFEM Program.

≠ Maintain situational awareness of encroachment challenges.

≠ Establish an IEMT and designate an Executive Director not lower than a

Group/CC level-equivalent.

≠ Ensure the IEMT receives encroachment management education and training.

≠ Engage external partners and stakeholders.

Executive Director of the IEMT

≠ Support implementation of the AFEM Program.

≠ Advise and update the installation commander on AFEM. Coordinate

IEMT activities.

≠ Ensure encroachment assessments are kept current.

≠ Establish and support stakeholder relationships.

Operations Group Commander

(OG/CC)

≠ Monitor missions within the IC/MF.

≠ Provide mission requirements and identify current and potential encroachment impacts to the IEMT.

≠ Oversee installation inputs to the Mission Compatibility Evaluation

Process for DoD Siting Clearinghouse project reviews.

Installation Office of the Staff Judge Advocate (JA)

≠ Provide legal opinions and advice on installation encroachment management matters.

≠ Consult with AFLOA/JACE to assure consistency and coordinate through the Regional Counsel to obtain approval for testimony or official statements.

Installation Public Affairs (PA)

≠ Incorporate encroachment challenges into media monitoring process to improve IEMT situational awareness.

≠ Coordinate the release of the Volume III: Community Brochure.

≠ Develop engagement themes and messages.

Table 2-1 Roles and Responsibilities

8 | P a g e

The list in Table 2-2 is a potential list of augmentees to the core IEMT based on the installation mission.

IEMT Augmentees Airspace Management Financial Management Airfield Management Real Property Air Traffic Control Test and Evaluation Tenants/Mission Partners Wing Plans/Future Operations

Spectrum Management Safety:

≠ Weapons ≠ Flight

Weather Bioenvironmental Communications Emergency Management Security Forces Environmental

Range Management Terminal Instrument Procedures

(TERPS)

Manpower Table 2-2 IEMT Augmentees

2.1.2 Stakeholders

It is important to know the stakeholders who can influence the AFEM process. The stakeholders could be any person or organization, either internal or external to the installation complex, having a personal, financial or other manifest interest in an issue or decision. Establishing relationships and nurturing existing partnerships helps form the basis for a successful engagement strategy. (Link to Stakeholder Section in Assess)

≠ The IEMT develops and maintains a list of stakeholders, with support from AFCEC.

≠ The IEMT leverages foundational programs to ensure attendance and participation at stakeholder meetings and hearings on encroachment and sustainment challenges, which could affect the installation’s ability to sustain its mission.

Developing public-private partnerships is a priority for the IEMT because external partners can be effective advocates of the installation’s mission with federal, state, local and non-governmental stakeholders.

When installation personnel do not have a clear understanding of where to begin development of public-private partnerships, local conservation groups can assist in identifying organizations.

At the state government level, environmental offices are a good source of information in discovering partnership opportunities and have contacts within private sector conservation groups.

Table 2-3 provides an illustration of various levels of stakeholders that may be identified in the Stakeholder Analysis.

Notional External Stakeholders

Stakeholder Examples

Elected Officials and Administrators Federal U.S. Representatives and U.S. Senators

State Governor and Lt. Governor, State Representatives and Senators

9 | P a g e

Notional External Stakeholders

Stakeholder Examples

Local Mayors and County Commissioners, City and County Managers

Governmental Agencies and Regulators

Federal

National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, Federal Aviation Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Native American Tribes

State

Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, Department of Transportation, Department of Public Health and the Environment, Department of Natural Resources, Parks Department, Land Management Department, Department of Agriculture

Local City and County Public Works and Development Department, Planning and Development Services, Regional Council of Governments

Table 2-3 Notional External Stakeholders

2.2 Stand up the IEMT

The IEMT is a cross-functional chartered working group, established by the Installation Commander, to assess and provide responses to AFEM issues that may constrain military readiness, impact operational capability and future mission growth. Under the AFEM strategy, the IEMT Executive Director is appointed at the discretion of the Installation Commander.

The IEMT can be reconfigured from existing teams or established as a new team. Existing teams that can be used as IEMTs include the Air Operations Board, the Facilities Board or the Environmental Safety and Occupational Health Council. If an Installation Commander decides to appoint an existing team as the IEMT, the team must be augmented with additional functional representatives. It is important to remember that encroachment management is not a Civil Engineering centric program. Civil Engineering personnel, while they are important stakeholders in encroachment management, do not necessarily need to be the default leaders of encroachment management efforts. For example, a Public Affairs person may have many more contacts and access outside the fence with various groups than an installation planner or Flight Chief. After a relationship has been established, other stakeholders from the installation can be included in the process.

While the IEMT is established by the Installation Commander, it is managed by an Executive Director who coordinates and supports implementation of the AFEM Program. Maintenance of AFEM standards is the responsibility of each IEMT member. To create a successful IEMT, the inclusion of tenant units and mission partners in all relevant proceedings is imperative because of the potential for internal AF encroachment. Maintaining open lines of communication between all installation units is necessary for successful execution of the AFEM Program.

The IEMT establishes situational awareness of encroachment challenges across the IC/MF; this is achieved by developing an understanding of each of its components, as well as maintaining relationships with stakeholders outside of the installation. This will enable the installation to have a proactive approach to encroachment problems instead of a reactive approach.

10 | P a g e

For example, after a residential development is constructed near an installation, the IEMT will have limited options. However, if a relationship with stakeholders outside the fence has been maintained, the likelihood of discovering plans for a proposed development is much higher.

Many developers (residential or otherwise) are much more likely to consider installation concerns presented by the IEMT early in the development process.

At Joint Bases, where the AF is designated as the supporting component, AF commanders are tasked with implementing the AFEM Program. The supporting commanders and organizations review resource requirements in the IC/MF to identify mission activities that could be affected by encroachment challenges and potential future mission activities. In this situation, the Joint Management Oversight Structure can be used as a mechanism to resolve program discrepancies and issues. (Link to Desk Reference)

2.2.1 Charter

The Executive Director appoints a member of the IEMT to develop/write the IEMT charter as early in the process as possible. The development of the charter should be a collaborative effort that includes input from as many installation stakeholders as possible. The charter will, at a minimum, contain the following sections:

≠ Objective ≠ Background ≠ Scope ≠ Functional Responsibilities of the IEMT ≠ Organization and Operations o AFEM Team Structure o AFEM Team Operations

Agenda Formal Minutes

The AFEM SharePoint site has several charters that can be used as examples. (Link to IEMT Sample Charter)

2.2.2 Meetings

Regular meetings are the key to ensuring foundational programs are leveraged effectively to manage encroachment. The Executive Director establishes the meeting frequency. It is important to schedule one meeting during the development of the Air Force Activity Management Plan (AFAMP)/Air Force Comprehensive Asset Management Plan (AFCAMP) to address encroachment issues. The Executive Director may call a meeting for timely consideration and action on encroachment related mission activities.

Members may request the Executive Director schedule a meeting for a specific issue.

For time sensitive issues, electronic coordination can be used at the discretion of the Executive Director.

IEMT members report on AFEM action items directly to the Executive Director during regular meetings. The IEMT should discuss and reach decisions by mutual agreement, build supportive relationships and develop standards of excellence. Potential agenda items include:

≠ Status of existing encroachment challenges and management actions.

≠ Status of ICEMAP management actions.

≠ New or upcoming stakeholder engagement opportunities.

11 | P a g e

≠ Proposed community development.

≠ Media monitoring trend analysis.

≠ Training in the AFEM process.

≠ Development of Readiness Environmental Protection Initiative (REPI) and/or

Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) proposals.

≠ Review MAJCOM EMT and Encroachment Management Working Group (EMWG) meeting minutes.

2.2.3 Issue Elevation

Although most encroachment and sustainment challenges are addressed at the installation level, situations arise where higher headquarters can provide guidance, assistance or be made aware of a potential situation, such as negative mission impacts, negative media attention or political interests. IEMTs should be prepared to elevate encroachment and sustainment challenges to the MAJCOM EMT for review and coordination, in accordance with AFI 90-2001. IEMTs may be invited to participate in MAJCOM or EMWG status updates. Routine communication between the IEMT and MAJCOM EMT promotes successful AFEM efforts across the IC/MF.

≠ AFPD 90-20 states the MAJCOM EMTs function across the MAJCOMs and the two DRUs (United States AF Academy and District of Washington). MAJCOM EMTs act as liaisons between the EMWG and installations to ensure relevant encroachment challenges are raised to the HAF. MAJCOM EMTs interact with PSUs when subject matter expertise is required to address encroachment challenges.

2.2.4 Schedule

2.2.4.1 Agenda

A formal agenda should be prepared, posted on the AFEM SharePoint site (AFEM SharePoint Home Page), and distributed to all members in accordance with the local IEMT Charter. The Executive Director approves all topics for discussion. Read-ahead materials are distributed in accordance with the local IEMT Charter.

2.2.4.2 Formal Minutes

Minutes are posted on the AFEM SharePoint site and are available to members in accordance with the local IEMT Charter. The minutes should capture key tasks and open items to ensure timely and effective action on initiatives. The minutes will serve as a reporting tool to MAJCOM EMTs and EMWG.

2.2.5 Training (AFEM Training Home Page)

The IEMT should have a general knowledge of other team functions and responsibilities.

The Executive Director ensures members complete available training, which is offered in several different forums; AFCEC offers training opportunities including CBT.

≠ Ensure members attend training opportunities provided by AFCEC for the IEMT level (FY Training).

≠ Informal training provides education and training within IEMT across functional areas. This can be accomplished through various mediums, such as PowerPoint presentations, informal briefings, talking papers, etc.

12 | P a g e

2.2.6 PSUs

IEMT members can request reach-back support from the Air Force Installation and Mission Support Center (AFIMSC) and PSUs on relevant encroachment and sustainment challenges when additional subject matter expertise is required. Key PSUs include:

≠ Air Force Civil Engineer Center (AFCEC) ≠ Air Force Weather Agency (AFWA) ≠ Air Force Spectrum Management Office (AFSMO) ≠ Air Force Flight Standards Agency (AFFSA) ≠ Air Force Safety Center (AFSEC) ≠ Air Force Security Forces Center (AFSFC)

2.3 Installation Complex/Mission Footprint (IC/MF)

Installations that have an external ICEMAP will already have the IC/MF identified. To effectively manage encroachment challenges, the Installation Commander needs to be aware of the IC/MF, which defines the spatial mission environment. The AFEM SharePoint site contains IC/MF maps from installations with completed ICEMAPs. A map and definition of the IC/MF can be found within an ICEMAP.

Figure 2-1 IC/MF Notional Map

2.3.1 Installation Complex (IC)

The IC portion of the IC/MF provides direct mission support and/or is managed by the installation or tenants. The IC is comprised of the main installation and its noncontiguous properties. The properties include auxiliary airfields, annexes, missile fields, ranges, military training routes, air space and landing/drop zones.

2.3.2 Mission Footprint (MF)

The MF portion of the IC/MF includes the IC plus any land, facilities, airspace and ranges providing direct routine mission support but are not managed or controlled by the AF.

≠ Link to ICEMAP Desk Reference ≠ Link to Monitor IC/MF section of playbook

2.3.3 Region of Influence (ROI)

The ROI includes areas outside of the IC/MF that are potentially impacted by IC activities and varies by specific activities and challenges being evaluated for potential effects. For

13 | P a g e each AFEM challenge being evaluated, the ROI delineates the geographic scope of potential impacts from the military activities. Each IC will have multiple challenge-specific ROIs. Table 2-4 illustrates the potential impact areas and items of interest for the IEMT. These items could be financial, physical or ecological.

Area of Influence Impact Areas within the ROI ROI Trends ≠ Local government: format, land use planning and growth management legislation.

≠ Infrastructure: transportation, waste and recycling services, utilities, communication towers and energy development.

≠ Population: including growth rate, socioeconomics and density.

Regulatory Processes ≠ Federal, state, or local laws or regulations related to encroachment challenges.

≠ Federal, state, or local laws or regulations that may impact engagement efforts.

Economic Interests ≠ Income and employment.

≠ Local and regional impact of the installation.

≠ DoD expenditures within the state.

Stakeholders Relationships ≠ Tribal, national, state and local actions taken by stakeholders.

≠ Opportunities for engagement: community forums, planning committees and parades.

Regional Ecosystem

Services ≠ Regional natural resources.

≠ Ecosystem health: forests, wetlands, estuaries and watersheds.

Local Sustainability Programs

≠ State or local programs aimed at enhancing sustainable practices.

≠ Energy efficiency, renewable energy and water conservation.

Table 2-4 Region of Influence

Figure 2-2 shows a GIS map of the Air Force Academy to illustrate the IC/MF and ROI.

The impact area is significantly larger when the ROI is taken into account and this requires awareness from IEMT. (Link to Monitor IC/MF section of playbook)

Figure 2-2 ROI for USAFA

2.3.4 Priority Region of Influence (PROI)

A priority area exists within the ROI: the PROI. This area is more localized where critical mission operations take place or stakeholder actions incompatible with mission operations are more likely to occur. The PROI defines areas where more aggressive

14 | P a g e monitoring and proactive engagement must occur as this region could contain highly sensitive issues. The ROI/PROI encompasses communities in which the installation has economic, political, cultural, social, environmental, legal and other contextual interests.

Figure 2-3 is an illustration of the ROI and PROI at Cannon AFB. The blue circle indicates the ROI, while the red circle indicates the PROI.

Figure 2-3 ROI and PROI

The factors that determine the PROI will vary based on the installation’s mission operations, encroachment challenges and stakeholder engagement. For example, one installation’s ROI focuses on counties that intersect high-usage airspace and the PROI focuses on the areas that contain the installation and nearby drop zones. The ROI/PROI guides installation-level engagement and helps prioritize stakeholder issues. (Link to AFI 90-2001, Encroachment Management)

15 | P a g e

Chapter 3 Assess The Assess element of AFEM identifies the What, How and Who of the encroachment management program. The ‘What’ are current and potential problems identified through encroachment studies.

The ‘How’ identifies the plans, strategies and timelines for addressing the items identified in the studies and explained in the ICEMAP. The ‘Who’ identifies all stakeholders required to address each specific item.

3.1 Encroachment Studies

The AF addresses encroachment issues though various programs including, among others, AICUZ, noise, spectrum interference and the ICEMAP process. The ICEMAP is an encroachment study and includes the development of management actions. Two types of ICEMAPs exist; internal and external. The internal study is mandatory for installations per AFI 90-2001, while the external is elective. The differences between the two studies are: the depth and extent of the analysis, the stakeholders involved in the process and the team conducting the study. Additional information is located on the AFEM SharePoint site.

3.2 ICEMAP

Active encroachment management requires a Management Action Plan to prioritize initiatives and resources. The completed ICEMAP will contain an “engagement strategy” on how to address each issue identified.

The ICEMAP is an installation specific, three-volume document that addresses current and potential encroachment and sustainment challenges. It is designed to assist the Installation Commander address and manage encroachment challenges and the impacts on installation operations.

≠ Volume 1 - Commander’s Action Plan ≠ Volume 2 - Reference Book ≠ Volume 3 - Community Brochure

The internal and external ICEMAPs have four basic items:

≠ Identification of encroachment and sustainment issues.

≠ Identification of resources and opportunities for overcoming identified threats within a Management Action Plan.

≠ A plan to address each challenge as required. Some challenges may not require action and are identified in the Engagement Strategy.

≠ A tracking tool for maintaining progress report information which is the Management

Action Spreadsheet. A template is located on the AFEM SharePoint site.

The ICEMAP includes an Encroachment Condition Summary, prioritized management actions and engagement tools. These materials require continuous maintenance by the IEMT.

There are four main objectives for an ICEMAP:

≠ Train installation and community personnel on the encroachment management framework.

≠ Engage internal and external stakeholders in promotion of compatible use partnerships.

≠ Reduce addresses the mitigation of the challenges where mission impacts are occurring.

16 | P a g e

≠ Prevent encourages the avoidance of encroachment challenges and encumbrances that affect the installation’s missions.

The compilation of these four components aids in the formation of viable solutions and creates a joint partnership for all the stakeholders. (Link to CBTs)

3.2.1 Internal ICEMAP

The internal ICEMAP focuses on leveraging existing foundational program resources and knowledge for successful encroachment management, but does not include active engagement with external stakeholders. Each installation has different requirements and resources available. As a result, internal ICEMAPs will vary by installation and are subject to an IEMT’s ability to gauge community impacts and relationships with stakeholders.

The internal ICEMAP should contain a description and a map of the IC/MF, encroachment condition summaries for relevant encroachment and sustainment challenge areas, Management Action Plan, Management Action Spreadsheet and a Stakeholder Matrix.

Maintaining the ICEMAP is mandated by AFI 90-2001, Encroachment Management. All ICEMAPs should be reviewed annually and consist of the following steps:

≠ Review the Encroachment Condition Summary.

≠ Review management actions and engagement tools.

≠ Identify new encroachment challenges.

≠ Identify new management actions, stakeholders and engagement tools.

3.2.2 External ICEMAP

The external ICEMAP includes a summary of numerous interviews and a rigorous analytical process.

The external ICEMAP is most often developed by a contractor, in coordination with the IEMT. AFCEC will provide reach-back support for the ICEMAP development. The research and analysis conducted during the development process is compiled and provided to the IEMT with recommended actions to address potential encroachment and sustainment challenge areas.

The information gathering process includes a full document review and interviews with all stakeholders. This process is imperative to the success of the ICEMAP development because it provides a complete picture of the IC/MF and a recommended set of management actions designed to resolve encroachment challenges. The information the installation receives from the contractor is designated as “For Official Use Only”, however, a corresponding brochure is created for the community. The brochure provides a visual depiction of the installation’s activities, operating areas, and stresses the importance of protecting these assets as part of the installation’s missions.

To achieve the ICEMAP objectives and to produce deliverables useful for the installation, development must be collaborative and iterative. The project team and the installation must work together to share an understanding of the encroachment management framework and installation challenges.

The external ICEMAP should contain a description and a map of the IC/MF, encroachment condition summaries for relevant encroachment and sustainment

17 | P a g e challenge areas, an evaluation of issues strategy that includes the entire IC/MF, Management Action Plan and Spreadsheet and a Stakeholder Matrix.

3.2.3 Compatible Land Use Strategy (CLUS)

The CLUS is a section within the external ICEMAP. It is a detailed examination of land use intended to identify actions that enable the installation to protect the mission from threats further out in the IC/MF. The CLUS utilizes Geographic Information System (GIS) based information and analysis to evaluate current mission operations and environmental preservation criteria and identify land areas where encroachment challenges exists or may occur. The CLUS includes visual aids which provide a better understanding of the land use/development pressures that can constrain military missions, highlight landscape scale requirements to promote compatible land use, and promote justification for associated management actions. The CLUS is included in Chapter 5 of the External ICEMAP, Volume II: Reference Book.

The CLUS analysis is intended to complement the AICUZ and JLUS initiatives to work toward the common goal of compatible land use, mission sustainment and encroachment management. The CLUS analysis focuses on areas within the IC, since those assets are managed by the installation.

The CLUS identifies critical land areas that protect the installation from encroachment, incompatible land uses and areas that present opportunities for addressing identified encroachment and sustainment challenges. Ultimately, the CLUS results identify compatible land use strategies and management actions as dictated in the external ICEMAP. The IEMT works in conjunction with other functional offices on the installation and the surrounding community to address any issues raised by the CLUS. The IEMT engages with stakeholders to specify implementation guidance.

In cases where a DoD-funded JLUS has been conducted, the CLUS section will include and endorse the JLUS recommendation. If a JLUS has not been conducted, but deemed beneficial, the ICEMAP will often recommend the installation pursue a JLUS in cooperation with the surrounding communities. (Link to CLUS Desk Reference/CBT)

Figure 3-1 CLUS Process

3.3 Foundational/Legacy Programs

The AFEM Program leverages existing foundational programs and relevant subject matter expertise to manage encroachment, rather than creating new or additional duties. Table 3-1 identifies the names of the existing programs, a high-level overview of each program and a link to the location of the information pertaining to each program.

18 | P a g e

Existing Foundational Programs Overview of Specific Programs Applicable Link

Air Installations Compatible Use Zones

(AICUZ) Program

Works to prevent incompatible development around AF installations by promoting compatible land use practices through collaboratively working with local governments to achieve mission compatible land development and engaging with local civic, real estate and development groups.

AICUZ Information AICUZ Handbook

Air Force Noise Program

Works with communities surrounding AF installations to minimize the impact of aircraft noise on civilian populations

Installation Development Plan

(IDP)

Illustrates the functional, physical and human aspects of areas to be developed. This plan can be short range, but should show proposed long-range physical changes. It includes roadways, pedestrian paths, parking, utility alignments, etc. Common applications are the flight line, community center, administration complexes, etc.

IDP Development Information

Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) Program

A planning study of civilian development patterns and land use activities in the vicinity of a military installation resulting in recommendations for instituting compatible civilian land use activities. The JLUS is funded by the OEA. See DoD Instruction 3030.3, Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) Program.

JLUS Program Information

Mission Compatibility Evaluation Process for renewable and other energy projects

In accordance with 32 CFR Part 211, Mission Compatibility Evaluation Process, the DoD evaluates mission compatibility of energy projects proposed within military training routes or special use areas.

DoD Siting Clearinghouse Home Page

Natural Resources Management

In accordance with AFI 32-7064, Integrated Natural Resources Management, and the Sikes Act, AF installations must develop and implement an INRMP.

The INRMP addresses all activities on an installation that may affect, or relate to, the conservation of natural resources, and includes goals and objectives to sustain the military mission and ecosystem integrity.

Natural Resource Management Playbook

Range Management Programs

Comprehensive Range Plans Range Management Plans Guidance

Air Quality Compliance and Resource

Management Program

To ensure compliance with the CAA, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 98, Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, and AFI 32-7040, Air Quality Compliance and Resource Management. Air Quality Program Managers and installation level personnel accomplish this by upholding emissions reporting standards and inspection and maintenance requirements for mobile and stationary sources.

Geographically separated units and overseas locations are bound by local laws and regulations and may require specialized consideration. Overseas installations should consult the Final Governing Standard (FGS) or Overseas Environmental Baseline Guidance Document (OEBGD).

Antiterrorism (AT) Programs

Installation Vulnerability Assessments AFI 10-245, Guidance on AT

19 | P a g e

Table 3-1 Foundational Programs

These foundational programs provide greater awareness, allowing the AF to anticipate, prevent and reduce the majority of encroachment and sustainment challenges. These programs can be leveraged to protect the ability of the AF to execute its mission.

3.3.1 Joint Land Use Study (JLUS)

The JLUS is similar to the ICEMAP. The ICEMAP is written from the perspective of the installation, while the JLUS is written from the perspective of the local governments and the role played in the protection and enhancement of the installation’s mission. The JLUS is a planning process that begins with understanding conditions and issues in the study area, identifying current and foreseeable compatibility challenges based on land use, growth and development trends. The JLUS addresses civilian and military interests and mission needs.

Compatibility challenges occur when military operations produce impacts which affect surrounding communities or when civilian growth and development interfere with the ability to conduct military operations safely and effectively.

Using public and agency feedback in addition to analysis, the JLUS develops recommendations to promote greater compatibility between military activities and civilian land uses. The IEMT works in conjunction with other functional offices on the installation and the surrounding community to address any issues raised by the study.

Existing Foundational Programs Overview of Specific Programs Applicable Link

Airspace Management Programs

OE/AAA Program:

Federal Regulation Title 14 Part 77 establishes standards and notification requirements for objects affecting navigable airspace. Notification allows the FAA to identify potential aeronautical hazards in advance to prevent or minimize the adverse impacts to safe and efficient use of navigable airspace. This notification is the basis for:

• Evaluating the effect of the construction or alteration on operating procedures.

• Determining the potential hazardous effect of the proposed construction on air navigation.

• Identifying mitigating measures to enhance safe air navigation.

• Charting of new objects.

OE/AAA Home Page

Cultural Resources Management

A suite of specific methods, techniques, policies, plans and practices that an agency uses to meet its responsibilities regarding cultural resources management and historic preservation. Cultural resources, including archaeological sites, historic properties and culturally significant sites or artifacts are identified, protected, maintained and preserved. AF installations are responsible for developing and implementing an Integrated Cultural Resources Management Plan (ICRMP). The ICRMP ensures all cultural resources located on AF lands are protected and managed in coordination with stakeholders.

Cultural Resource Management Playbook

Communications Programs

Air Force Spectrum Interference Resolution (AFSIR) Program

AFI 10-707, Guidance on AFSIR

20 | P a g e

The IEMT engages with stakeholders to develop a strategic action plan with specific implementation guidance. The process concludes with a detailed look at action steps to implement recommendations. These recommendations are not binding, but participants are asked to make a good faith effort to implement the proposed action steps.

3.3.2 Air Installations Compatible Use Zones (AICUZ)

The AF AICUZ Program works to prevent incompatible development around military air installations by promoting compatible land use practices. AICUZ Program objectives include protecting the public health, safety and welfare from the impacts of AF activities within the AICUZ area of influence and protecting AF operations from the impacts of incompatible development. The concept of collaboratively working with local governments to achieve mission compatible land development and engaging with local civic, real estate and development groups is critical to AFEM strategies. The AICUZ Program remains one of the primary foundational programs for the AFEM Program.

(Link to AICUZ Handbook and AICUZ Playbook)

3.4 Stakeholders

Two types of stakeholders exist: internal and external. Development and sustainment of relationships with these groups is essential to successful AFEM implementation. Effective stakeholder engagement strategies require understanding the quality, type and frequency these relationships support. Installation personnel are assigned to engage with external stakeholders, however, this responsibility is also within the scope of the IEMT. The IEMT and functional representatives coordinate the engagement effort. The AICUZ handbook has additional stakeholder strategies. (Link to AICUZ Handbook)

3.4.1 Internal Stakeholders

Internal stakeholders are identified as the installation mission partners. Understanding the requirements, vulnerabilities and future vision of this group is imperative to success. Installations incorporate tenant and mission partner missions and operating space into the AFEM Program and include them in the encroachment studies and ICEMAPs. At Joint Bases, supporting commanders are responsible for implementing encroachment management in support of the operational mission. Any internal host tenant conflicts over resources are typically resolved through adjustments to internal processes and procedures defined in host tenant agreements.

3.4.2 External Stakeholders

External stakeholders’ considerations include community perspectives, quality of relationships, regulatory protections and information sharing related to encroachment management efforts. Each component is explained in detail throughout the External Study and ICEMAP Development Desk Reference. The Functional Engagement Plan describes the influence of each stakeholder and the specific members of the IEMT who should communicate with each stakeholder.

21 | P a g e

Chapter 4 Act

The Act element builds on the Organize and Assess elements providing guidance to IEMT members in effectively reducing, managing and preventing encroachment challenges. The Act portion is a crucial element of AFEM and includes IEMT responsibilities such as:

≠ Obtaining education and training.

≠ Leveraging foundational programs to execute management actions and engagement strategies.

≠ Building active partnerships with both internal and external stakeholders to establish long term relationships.

≠ Elevating issues that require additional resources.

≠ Building resource requirements.

≠ Developing and utilizing engagement tools.

4.1 IEMT Functions

The IEMT Executive Director leverages the expertise and knowledge of each IEMT member to implement the AFEM Program, including oversight and coordination of routine meetings, encroachment studies and stakeholder outreach efforts as shown in Figure 4-1.

Figure 4-1 IEMT Functions

4.1.1 Encroachment Challenges and Management Actions

Encroachment challenges are prioritized based on potential mission impacts (see the Internal Study and ICEMAP Desk Reference for more information). Management Actions may address single encroachment challenges or multiple challenge areas. These actions are developed to reduce, prevent or manage the impacts of encroachment.

Installations may re-order, remove and add new Management Actions as priorities change and the Encroachment Condition Summary is revised. Click for a link to the Template for tracking Management Actions.

The IEMT applies careful consideration and risk management in the assignment of resources to manage encroachment challenges and mission constraints. The Act

Meet on a Regular Basis

•Maintain an Agenda

•Maintain Meeting Minutes

Review and Validate Management

Actions/Challenges

•Identify Encroachment Projects

•Prioritize Encroachment Projects

Stakeholders

•Cultivate Relationships •Maintain Relationships

22 | P a g e element requires implementation of ICEMAP Management Actions, illustrated in Figure 4-2.

Action 1: Establish an Installation Encroachment Management Team (IEMT)

OPR: [INSTALLATION COMMANDER] OCR: [GROUP COMMANDER or other equivalent office]

The creation of an IEMT allows the installation to more effectively address encroachment challenges throughout the IC/MF through cross-functional collaboration. In addition, the IEMT serves as the primary intermediary between installation-level encroachment challenges and the MAJCOM EMT.

IEMT members engage their counterparts within local, state and federal entities to coordinate actions that address encroachment challenges.

Figure 4-2 Notional Management Actions

4.1.2 The Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR)

The OPR for Management Actions identifies the actions and/or projects and resource requirements necessary to support implementation of the AFEM Program. If resources are required, they must compete for funds in the applicable Base Activity Management Plan (BAMP). They are prioritized in the Base Comprehensive Asset Management Plan (BCAMP). The MAJCOM captures these requirements in the appropriate MAJCOM Activity Management Plan (MAMP) and prioritizes them in the MAJCOM Comprehensive Asset Management Plan (MCAMP). HAF captures the appropriate requirements in the AFAMP which supports the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) and is prioritized in the AFCAMP. (Link to AFAMP Playbook and AFCAMP Playbook)

Other functional organizations responsible for the foundational programs may establish the strategy for funding their installation’s ICEMAP actions. IEMT actions to build and align resource requirements include:

≠ Determine if local resources are sufficient to implement and support AFEM efforts. Work cooperatively with the local community for outcomes that are beneficial to both internal and external stakeholders.

≠ Research other stakeholder partnerships and cost sharing opportunities.

≠ Promote compatible land use through real estate interests (e.g., through 10

U.S.C. §2684a/Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration).

≠ Advocate at MAJCOM and HAF levels for additional resources when all other options have been exhausted.

≠ Prioritize projects within the installation.

≠ Identify other stakeholder advocates (e.g., other government agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and non-profit groups).

4.2 Annual Report

Note: Process changing based on AFIMSC

The IEMT maintains situational awareness of the IC/MF and provides annual updates on the status of current and potential encroachment and sustainment challenges within their respective program areas to the MAJCOM EMT. New or emerging encroachment challenges

23 | P a g e not identified in the ICEMAP may be brought to the attention of the IEMT and addressed by the installation at any time or as resources allow.

The IEMT briefs the Installation Commander and internal stakeholders, at least annually, on encroachment, emerging threats, recommended encroachment management focus areas and the progress on prioritized action items for the coming fiscal year. The IEMT provides this information to the MAJCOM EMT annually.

4.3 Issue Elevation

Most encroachment and sustainment challenges are addressed at the installation level, but some situations require guidance or assistance from the MAJCOM or HAF/SAF. Issue elevation is depicted in Figure 4-3. HAF mediates conflicts between tenants and hosts under different MAJCOMs or Services. PA and JA support engagement efforts by providing advice on message development, risk communications, media relations and legal matters. IEMTs can elevate issues to the MAJCOM EMT, using their own discretion, in unique or extreme circumstances, when installation resources have been exhausted.

Figure 4-3 Elevating Encroachment Issues Review

4.4 Stakeholder Engagement

The success of AF missions and the AFEM Program depend on the attainment of successful relationships between the installation and community. Engagement can occur formally and informally and techniques can be combined to form a strategic approach.

These engagement components aid the installations to stay ahead of emerging issues, facilitate the building of relationships with community stakeholders and put protections in place to address current and future encroachment challenges. IEMT members should ensure

IEMT Action Required The IEMT will elevate encroachment challenges to the MAJCOM when additional guidance, support or resources are needed and/or to promote situational awareness.

MAJCOM EMT Action Required The MAJCOM will elevate encroachment challenges to HAF/SAF when AF-wide action is required to manage extremely diverse, unique or widespread encroachment challenges.

USAF EMWG Action Required HAF/SAF will elevate encroachment challenges to SECAF/CSAF when AF missions or national security are significantly threatened by encroachment

SB-ESG Action Required ion Required will elevate e s to the MAJC l guidance, su s are needed a situational aw

M EMT Action JCOM will elev hment challen F-wide action extremely div ead encroach

MWG Action AF will elevate ges to SECAF/ ns or national antly threaten chment

ESG Action Require

24 | P a g e stakeholders’ interests are considered to promote a mutually beneficial approach in managing encroachment challenges. Figure 4-4 depicts the elements of successful engagement strategy.

Figure 4-4 Stakeholder Engagement Strategy

The IEMT engages communities within the IC/MF. In addition to the engagement activities identified through the encroachment study process, stakeholder engagement occurs through the implementation of foundational programs.

Cooperation among the Executive Director, IEMT members and functional representatives is essential in identifying and analyzing encroachment challenges and preparing the installation’s positions and responses. The IEMT works closely with PA and JA to develop a communication plan to interact with civic leaders, media and elected officials. This coordination ensures a consistent AF message is sent to surrounding communities in presentations, brochures, and fact sheets.

Figure 4-5 depicts stakeholder engagement.

Analyze • Installations, community and regulatory context

Identify

• Stakeholders and align them with AFEM representatives

• Prioritize stakeholders using IC/MF as guideline

• Variety of engagement opportunities

Monitor

• Media for community and installation challenges

• Develop themes and other communication for stakeholder communication

Actively Particpate

≠ Follow up and adapt to address encroachment challenges

Stakeholder Engagement

INTERNAL

ENGAGEMENT

• Coordinating with IEMT

• Reaching out to the counterparts in other functional areas and foundational programs

• Interacting…