General_Transformation_Info.pdf

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY PAD 12 - 03

Headquarters United States Air Force

(HQ USAF)

Program Action Directive (PAD) 12-03

Implementation of Enterprise-Wide Civil Engineer Transformation

26 October 2012 Headquarters United States Air Force

Washington, D.C.

i

BASIC PLAN TO PAD 12-03

PREFACE

The Air Force Office of the Civil Engineer (CE) initiated its Civil Engineer Transformation (CET) planning in 2006 and started implementing the plan in 2007 with the approval of PAD 07- 02, dated 19 April 2007. PAD 07-02 laid the foundation for the CET journey. The actions outlined in this PAD continue the Air Force civil engineer’s effort to implement a multi-pronged asset management approach to centralize, standardize, streamline, re-organize, and enhance efficiency at all levels of the CE enterprise. Through increased centralization, improved management and oversight of requirements, comprehensive program development, and efficient execution, the Air Force will better apply its limited resources and reduce risk to mission and Airmen. The CET effort significantly helps the Air Force meet its overall savings objectives, in terms of dollars and manpower reductions, and will assist the Air Force to better prioritize its future requirements in a fiscally constrained environment. Air Force civil engineers will reduce overall costs and manpower while optimizing operational support by applying the principles of asset management across the enterprise.

ii

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 – TITLE

The title of this document is “Headquarters United States Air Force, Program Action Directive 12-03, Implementation of Enterprise-Wide Civil Engineer Transformation.”

The short title is “Civil Engineer Transformation PAD 12-03.”

2.0 – APPROVAL AUTHORITY AND EFFECTIVE PERIOD

This document is effective upon signature of the Secretary and Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force.

3.0 – OFFICE OF PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY

The office of origin is HQ USAF/A7C.

Oversight for this PAD is provided by Col Frank Freeman, SAF/IE, DSN 227-7003.

The Action Officer for PAD development and coordination is Ms. Liesel Golden, AF/A7CI, DSN 222-9722.

4.0 – SECURITY

This document is UNCLASSIFIED, is FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY, and does not fall within the scope of directives governing the protection of information affecting the national security of the United States.

5.0 – REPRODUCTION

This document may be reproduced for official Air Force use.

6.0 – DISPOSITION

Dispose of excess copies of this document according to applicable directives. Do not return to originator.

RECORD OF CHANGES

# Date Description Authority iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

BASIC PLAN TO PAD 12-03 ....................................................................................................................... i

PREFACE .................................................................................................................................................. i

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS..................................................................................................................... ii

1.0 – TITLE .......................................................................................................................................... ii

2.0 – APPROVAL AUTHORITY AND EFFECTIVE PERIOD ......................................................... ii

3.0 – OFFICE OF PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY .............................................................................. ii

4.0 – SECURITY .................................................................................................................................. ii

5.0 – REPRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... ii

6.0 – DISPOSITION ............................................................................................................................. ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................. iii

1.0 – PURPOSE

2.0 – AUTHORITY/REFERENCES

3.0 – BACKGROUND

4.0 – OBJECTIVES

5.0 – EXECUTION

6.0 – ASSUMPTIONS

7.0 – GUIDANCE

8.0 – EFFECTIVE DATE

9.0 – OPR

10.0 – PUBLIC AFFAIRS (PA) GUIDANCE

APPENDIX I: GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE

APPENDIX II: STRATEGIC INTEGRATION AND COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING

APPENDIX III: REQUIREMENTS IDENTIFICATION AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT

APPENDIX IV: STRATEGIC EXECUTION OF DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

REQUIREMENTS

APPENDIX V: OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE

APPENDIX VI: ENVIRONMENTAL

APPENDIX VII: REAL PROPERTY

APPENDIX VIII: BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC) CLEANUP AND DISPOSAL

OF PROPERTY

APPENDIX IX: READINESS

APPENDIX X: FACILITY ENERGY

iv

APPENDIX XI: FAMILY AND UNACCOMPANIED HOUSING

APPENDIX XII: FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

APPENDIX XIII: HAF ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

APPENDIX XIV: AFCEC ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

APPENDIX XV: MAJCOM ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

APPENDIX XVI: INSTALLATION ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

APPENDIX XVII: CE GROUP/DIRECTORATE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

APPENDIX XVIII: ACRONYM LIST

ANNEX A: MILESTONES .................................................................................................................. A-129

ANNEX B: MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL ...................................................................................... B-3

APPENDIX I TO ANNEX B.................................................................................................................... B-4

APPENDIX II TO ANNEX B ................................................................................................................ B-10

ANNEX C: COMPTROLLER-FUNDING ............................................................................................ C-13

ANNEX E: ENGINEERING AND SERVICES – ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND ANALYSIS .. E-3

ANNEX F: LOGISTICS ........................................................................................................................... F-3

ANNEX G: COMMAND, CONTROL, COMMUNICATIONS AND COMPUTERS ........................... G-3

ANNEX H: ADMINISTRATION ............................................................................................................ H-3

ANNEX I: PUBLIC AFFAIRS; CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION ................................................. I-2

ANNEX J: SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE (SAF) RESPONSIBILITIES ...................................... J-4

ANNEX K: HQ USAF RESPONSIBILITIES .......................................................................................... K-4

ANNEX L: AIR STAFF POINTS OF CONTACT .................................................................................. L-4

ANNEX M: MAJOR COMMAND RESPONSIBILITIES ..................................................................... M-2

ANNEX N: LEGAL ................................................................................................................................. N-2

ANNEX O: CONTRACTING ................................................................................................................ O-13

ANNEX X: DISTRIBUTION ................................................................................................................... X-3

1.0 – PURPOSE

This PAD provides direction to implement efficiency and cost cutting initiatives under CET Spirals 2, 3, and 4. This PAD accelerates the CET in response to current Air Force budget cuts and identifies realignment of program responsibilities, organizational structures, authorities, and resources needed to implement the initiatives under the following spirals:

1.1. Spiral 2 (field operating agency [FOA]/ HQ USAF Reorganization): Restructures Air Staff and FOA organizations by reducing both the AF/A7C staff and FOAs by 104 positions (Change Control Number [CCN] 3R3P772A reduced the CE FOAs by 69 civilians and realigned 11 military; remaining reductions were generated by other CCNs) and merging the functions of the Air Force Center for Engineering and the Environment (AFCEE), the Air Force Civil Engineer Support Agency (AFCESA), and the Air Force Real Property Agency (AFRPA) into one FOA, which will be known as the Air Force Civil Engineer Center (AFCEC). Personnel associated with each FOA will remain in place and operating locations (OL) or detachments will be established to leverage existing intellectual capital.

1.2. Spiral 3 (Installation Support Centralization [ISC] course of action [COA] 3):

Centralizes select major command (MAJCOM) programs and processes (Environmental Quality [EQ], National Environmental Policy Act [NEPA] compliance, and real property (RP) management at the AFCEC and reorganizes MAJCOM CE staff.

MAJCOM Change Control Numbers (MCCNs) 912C2023, 213R3010, and 214R3010 reduced MAJCOM staffs by 141 civilian authorizations and reduced AFCESA and AFCEE by 42 civilian authorizations. Of the 141 MAJCOM reductions, 78 authorizations were reinvested in the existing CE FOAs. These affected MAJCOM civilians may remain at their current location and be aligned into an existing FOA OL established at each MAJCOM. The target date for completion of all personnel actions required to realign the affected individuals to the AFCEC was 1 June 2012. This structure will remain in place for two years. After two years, the AFCEC will move the continental United States (CONUS) RP positions back to the AFCEC’s primary locations. The AFCEC will evaluate the effectiveness of their other positions and may choose to move them to another OL or back to the primary locations. This will be accomplished by 1 October 2014. The Vice Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force (VCSAF) approved these initiatives on 16 December 2010 as part of the ISC efficiency initiative (COA 3). This PAD also directs the next steps in the continuation of PAD 07- 02 by completing centralization of the Environmental Restoration Account (ERA) MAJCOM positions at the AFCEC. PAD 07-02 established the Air Force ERA Program Management Office (PMO) to develop and implement optimal programmatic and execution strategies for the ERA program, manage the Air Force’s ERA total obligation authority (TOA), and maintain associated data management systems for tracking and reporting. Consistent with the direction of this PAD, the ERA PMO will implement efficiency and cost cutting initiatives. All ERA-funded MAJCOM headquarters (HQ) positions will either be abolished or realigned to the AFCEC or AFCEC OL positions at installations beginning in Fiscal Year (FY) 2013. The AFCEC will utilize these positions to support centralized ERA program management and provide execution oversight and overall ERA planning and programming. Affected MAJCOM HQ civilians may remain at their current location and be aligned into the OL on other than ERA funded positions, if available, or to base-level vacant ERA positions.

1.3. Spiral 4 (Global Base Support [GBS]): Reorganizes base-level civil engineer (CE squadrons (CES), transforming programming, design, and environmental quality capabilities and streamlining resources and operations. This initiative reduces base-level authorizations by 968 civilian positions (CCNs 3R3N753L and 3C1N753L). To minimize risk, 222 new positions (CCNs 3R3N753L and 3C1N753L) will be established in the AFCEC OLs to support the installations. The local force support squadron (FSS) will manage the positions. Personnel reassignments should be completed and all positions filled or proposed to be filled no later than (NLT) 1 December 2012. The AFCEC will utilize these positions to support centralized program management and provide execution oversight and overall facility planning and programming. This PAD also directs the next steps in the continuation of PAD 07-02 by completing centralization of the ERA base level positions at the AFCEC. Consistent with the direction of this PAD, the ERA PMO will implement efficiency and cost cutting initiatives, as described above in paragraph 1.2. Base-level ERA positions will be removed as the corresponding ERA mission draws down at those installations.

Implementation of PAD 12-03 will require 25 funded explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) (3E8XX) manpower authorizations to be transferred between commands to ensure balanced EOD support for the Air Force. This PAD and EOD Optimization Phase 2 (built on Program Budget Decision [PBD] 720) support CET and align current EOD squadron manpower to satisfy Air Force mission changes. With the newly released EOD Capabilities-Based Manpower Standard and EOD Optimization Phase 2, the flight optimization in this PAD is designed to mitigate increasing difficulties in maintaining homeland defense and deployment workloads, while not exceeding requirements determined by the recent Air Force CE Blue Suit Review. It ensures efficient and effective distribution of EOD requirements by creating consistent flight and unit type code (UTC) structures across MAJCOMs. EOD manpower programming actions will be effective FY14. Total end strength transfer to Air Force District of Washington (AFDW) is 11 enlisted manpower authorizations, and total end strength transfer to Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC) is 14 enlisted manpower authorizations. Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC) will transfer 14 enlisted manpower authorizations to AFGSC. AFMC will transfer three enlisted manpower authorizations to AFDW. United States Air Forces in Europe (USAFE) will transfer eight enlisted manpower authorizations to AFDW.

1.4. Details of the initiatives aligned under the various CET spirals have been integrated into enterprise-wide CE capabilities and will be presented under the following capability groups: (i) governance structure, (ii) strategic integration and comprehensive planning, (iii) requirements identification and program development, (iv) strategic execution of design and construction requirements, (v) operations and maintenance (O&M), (vi) environmental, (vii) RP, (viii) Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) cleanup and disposal of property, (ix) readiness, (x) facility energy, (xi) military family housing (MFH) and unaccompanied housing (UH), and (xii) financial management.

The capability appendices of this PAD are organized to reflect CE enterprise capabilities and do not represent the organizational structure at any level. Specific organizational structures for Headquarters Air Force (HAF), FOA, MAJCOM, and installation are addressed in Appendices XIII-XVII.

2.0 – AUTHORITY/REFERENCES

2.1. Air Force Instruction (AFI) 10-501, Program Action Directives (PADs) and Programming Plans (P-Plans), 5 January 1994

2.2. AFI 38-101, Air Force Organization, 16 March 2011

2.3. Air Force Policy Directive (AFPD) 38-1, Organization and Unit Designations, 24 August 2011

2.4. AFI 38-204, Programming USAF Manpower, 1 August 1999

2.5. HQ USAF PAD 06-09, Implementation of the Chief of Staff of the Air Force Direction to Establish an Air Force Component Organization

2.6. AFI 32-9005, Real Property Accountability and Reporting, 14 August 2008

2.7. AFI 16-403, Updating the USAF Program Installations, Units, and Priorities and Movement of Air Force Units, 30 January 2012

2.8. AFI 32-1021, Planning and Programming Military Construction (MILCON) Projects, 14 June 2010

2.9. AFI 32-1024, Standard Facility Requirements, 11 July 2011

2.10. AFI 32-1063, USAF Electric Power Systems, 10 June 2005

2.11. Air Force Manual 32-1084, Facility Requirements, 20 April 2012

2.12. AFPD 32-70, Environmental Quality, 20 July 1994

2.13. AFI 10-503, Strategic Basing, 27 September 2010

2.14. AFI 25-201, Support Agreements Procedures, 1 May 2005

2.15. CE Internal Military Requirements Review, 2006

2.16. HAF Mission Directive 1-18, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Installations, Environment and Logistics), 4 March 2009

2.17. HAF Mission Directive 1-38, Deputy Chief of Staff of the Air Force (Logistics, Installations and Mission Support), 5 October 2009

2.18. Under Secretary of the Air Force and VCSAF Memo “ISC Implementation” (“Go Do Letter”), 26 April 2012

3.0 – BACKGROUND

3.1 Current budget cuts have created the impetus to accelerate the CET efforts across the CE enterprise. The Air Force civil engineers initiated their CET planning in 2006 and started implementing the plan in 2007 with the approval of PAD 07-02, “Implementation of Civil Engineer (CE) Transformation Plan,” dated 19 April 2007.

PAD 07-02 laid the foundation for the CET journey, an effort which is continued and accelerated under PAD 12-03. The PAD 07-02 effort included military requirements (Blue Suit Review) to ensure minimum levels of Total Force military engineers were available to provide the distinctive combat capability that Prime Base Engineer Emergency Force (Prime BEEF) and RED HORSE units bring to battle to support the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). CET efficiencies in PAD 07-02 centralized capital construction execution management at AFCEE, revised Fire Emergency Services (FES) Concept of Operations (CONOPs), re-engineered three of AFMC’s CE groups, enhanced EOD and RED HORSE war-fighting capabilities, and reorganized the CESs. PAD 07-02 achieved manpower savings of 1,873 positions.

3.2 Starting in 2007, the Air Force CET proactively identified efficiency opportunities through consolidation of functions, re-organization, and re-engineering of capabilities at all organizational levels. This PAD advances the CET by guiding actions to implement CET Spirals 2-4 (FOA/HAF Reorganization, ISC COA 3 and GBS). CET Spirals 2-4 establish standard business practices, promote use of Air Force Common Output Level Standards (AF COLS), and increase centralized asset management practices to help preserve mission capability while absorbing mandated manpower reductions and budget cuts.

3.3 Unexpected execution risk was introduced to Spirals 2-4 by additional Air Force civilian personnel cuts (approximately 421) within CE units. These impacts are still being assessed and will be addressed when the full impact is determined after initial operating capability (IOC). CET efforts since 2007 have reduced CE manning by over

3,000 positions, while the corresponding number of installations and infrastructure has remained essentially unchanged.

4.0 – OBJECTIVES

4.1 Under the authority of the Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF), implement CET Spirals 2-4 (FOA/HAF Reorganization, ISC COA 3, and GBS) as described in paragraphs 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3.

4.2 Transform key CE capabilities to achieve the best use of defense dollars, maintain CE core competencies, provide effective, “full spectrum” CE combat support, and provide efficient installation support. Those key capabilities include: strategic integration and comprehensive planning, requirements identification and program development, design and construction, O&M, environmental, RP, BRAC cleanup and disposal of property, readiness, energy, MFH and UH, furnishings management, and financial management.

4.3 Outline the actions necessary to realign manpower, resources, and organizational structures across all levels of CE organizations.

4.4 Maintain intellectual capital and, where possible, minimize adverse personnel impacts for the approximately 300 positions identified to realign from CESs and MAJCOMs to the AFCEC. Utilizing a Civilian Employment Cost Management Committee, final planning will be approved by the AF/A7C NLT 1 October 2012, and final disposition of the manpower authorizations will be completed by 1 October 2014.

4.5 Ensure continuity of services provided by CE organizations through this transformation to ensure mission requirements are satisfactorily accomplished to support installation and combatant commanders.

4.6 Employ a standardized activity management planning process to develop investment plans which meet strategic goals and support mission-critical needs by addressing the Air Force’s most urgent requirements first. An enterprise gap analysis will provide information to guide CE investment planning by using comprehensive data on facility/infrastructure asset inventories/conditions and analyzing against current and future mission needs. Coupled with a life-cycle approach to installation sustainment, available funds will be targeted to where they provide the greatest Air Force value and cost benefit. CET will use activity management plans (AMP) for key functional areas to inform the Program Objective Memorandum (POM) process of out-year requirements. Integrated priority lists (IPL) for major program areas will form the budget year execution plan referred to as the comprehensive asset management plan (CAMP). The AMP/CAMP process and resulting products are built from products initiated at the base through the identification of requirements, validated and prioritized through the MAJCOMs, and formed into a comprehensive Air Force investment plan at the AFCEC, ensuring a comprehensive requirements identification, validation, and prioritization process. In all cases the process includes Air Force mission success. The Installations Governance Structure (IGS) (Figure 2) is the body that approves the Air Force activity management plan (AFAMP) requirements for Core Function Master Plan and POM development and approves the Air Force comprehensive asset management plan (AFCAMP) projects for budget execution. The IGS embodies installation and MAJCOM input for the AFCEC investment plan development and HAF approval.

4.7 CET will use AMPs as the primary management tool to guide day-to-day services.

AMPs capture the AF COLS through CE levels of service (LoS), both regulatory and customer/mission needs driven, and define the delta between AF COLS and current condition to inform future requirements (e.g., facility investments).

4.8 Centralizing CE programs is a key asset management principle for effectively using limited resources by addressing the Air Force’s most important, mission-critical needs from an enterprise perspective. MILCON, environmental restoration funds, and a portion of the restoration and modernization (R&M) funds (e.g., Focus Funds for dormitory, energy, and airfields) are already centralized. CET centralizes the remainder of the R&M funds and EQ funds while keeping the majority of the sustainment funds decentralized with the MAJCOMs.

4.8.1 MAJCOMs will have input into the requirements and resourcing process in two ways.

4.8.1.1 Steady state: Each installation is already responsible to provide prioritized requirements via their AMPs to inform the POM and develop an annual execution plan. The annual execution plan requirements and priorities are validated and integrated by the MAJCOM into an IPL, which is used in the R&M model to develop an Air Force IPL with a focus to reduce risk to mission and Airmen. The “Centrally Funded Requirement Overall Process Flow” (Figure 1) shows how this process works and includes both reclama and appeals processes that end ultimately at the VCSAF level.

Figure 1. Centrally Funded Requirement Overall Process Flow

4.8.1.2 Emergency requirements, such as storm damage, will use current processes with installation/MAJCOM funding from internal resources, tracking via emergency & special program (ESP) code and requesting reimbursement through financial management channels, from the central withhold account using currently established procedures. Close coordination with the Financial Management Board (FMB) will ensure funds are budgeted appropriately.

4.8.1.3 For emergent requirements (any requirement identified after AFCAMP approval which is not an emergency requirement), such as short notice mission requirements, installations/MAJCOMs will add these to their AMPs and prioritize using the new requirements process. Installations and MAJCOMs will make the decision whether to include the requirement in the current CAMP cycle for the following fiscal year or submit for funding consideration in the current fiscal year. Annually, a majority of the central R&M program will be funded early in the year to leverage the construction market bid environment to generate savings while leveling engineering and contracting workload. As emergent requirements surface, they will be vetted by MAJCOM/CVs through AF/A7C who will determine whether or not the requirements will be funded within the current fiscal year or not. If funded within the current fiscal year, the requirement will either be forwarded to SAF/FMB for funding from the central withhold account or will be prioritized against the remaining unexecuted Air Force prioritized R&M projects and the most urgent requirements will be funded first.

MAJCOMs may reclama an AF/ 7C decision to hold for the next year and ultimately appeal to VCSAF as required. Some requirements may be postured to compete for end-of-year funding within the MAJCOM or Air Force, and if funding is not available, requirements will be prioritized in the next fiscal year.

4.8.2 Asset Management Process and Air Force IPL.

4.8.2.1 CET employs a standardized AMP process to develop investment plans that support mission-critical needs while addressing the United States Air Force’s most urgent requirements first, minimizing the risk to mission and Airmen. This is not a new process; for the past four years, the Air Force has used AMPs to capture, validate, and prioritize all Air Force infrastructure requirements and drive CAMPs. CET will use AMPs/CAMPs to (1) inform the POM process of Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) requirements and (2) build facility/infrastructure investment IPLs for major program areas. In the near term, the AMP/CAMP products are built from installation-identified requirements validated and prioritized through the MAJCOMs to AFCEC/Air Staff, ensuring comprehensive requirements identification, validation, and prioritization processes. As CET evolves over time, the majority of asset “life-cycle requirements” will be identified through the implementation of a sustainability management system (SMS) capability. The SMS, using specific data (e.g., inventory, asset age, asset condition, maintenance actions) will identify basic investment requirements needed to maintain assets at a standard LoS (based on mission needs, legal or regulatory requirements, asset performance, and cost) over the life of the asset. The installation, by maintaining the data set used by the SMS, will continue to have input to the process.

In all cases, the process includes Air Force leadership at installation, MAJCOM, and Air Staff levels and incorporates engineering judgment to determine final investments needed as measured by defined AF COLS. MAJCOMs will validate and advocate their IPL to ensure all requirements are captured while minimizing risk. Although the new process will result in an Air Force-wide IPL for R&M projects vice one for each MAJCOM, it allows for both reclama by the MAJCOM with adjudication by AF/A7C and appeal to VCSAF if the MAJCOM disagrees with the AF/A7C determination. This funding process under this construct is similar to current execution of the MILCON program and focus fund prioritization for dormitory and energy projects.

4.8.3 IGS (Appendix I).

4.8.3.1 The IGS does not replace the CE governance structure (Panels, Program Groups, Board, and Council) established in 2009 to manage and facilitate an enterprise-wide inclusive and decision making process for CE.

4.8.3.2 The IGS ensures MAJCOMs have a voice to ensure mission needs are addressed. The Installations Executive Council (IEC) is the strategic level forum used to incorporate Air Staff and Secretariat vision, priorities, and goals into CE decisions and processes.

MAJCOM CVs will be provided semi-annual program management reviews to address on-going and proposed future actions impacting their MAJCOM and present the opportunity to address any MAJCOM specific issues or concerns. The next tier of the governance structure, the Civil Engineer Council (CEC), includes Deputy Assistant Secretaries (DAS) for Installations, Energy, and Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health (ESOH); the new AFCEC Director; and MAJCOM A7s, A4/7s, and A6/7s as appropriate. It will use the IEC’s strategic guidance to review and approve the Air Force requirements (AFAMP) and Air Force priorities (AFCAMP) for execution. Core Function Lead Integrator (CFLI) representatives will also be included to aid in POM development. The Installations Integration Group (I2G) integrates all requirements to create the AFAMP and AFCAMP and is the primary link for MAJCOM and installation input.

5.0 – EXECUTION

5.1. AF/A7C will provide oversight for the execution of this PAD.

5.2. A FOA Transition Team has been established to ensure a smooth and orderly transition to AFCEC.

5.3. The Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR) of each functional annex in this PAD will report accomplishment of their respective actions to the PAD OPR, AF/A7C.

5.4. There will be one overall P-Plan to delineate responsibilities for the installations, MAJCOMs, AFCEC and HAF.

5.5. Existing Joint Base Memorandum of Agreements (MOA), as well as Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) joint base policies, remain in effect and shall be complied with while transforming the CE enterprise.

6.0 – ASSUMPTIONS

6.1. The Air Force will redesignate AFCESA as AFCEC.

6.2. Secretariat delegation of authorities will remain in place and will be revised as required.

6.3. Appropriate Air Force Directives, Instructions, or other exercises of authority will be accomplished or revised as needed to support implementation.

6.4. Appropriate support agreements (such as host tenant support agreement [HTSA], inter-service support agreement [ISSA], memorandum of understanding [MOU]/MOA, interagency agreements required by Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act [CERCLA]) will be accomplished/revised as needed to support implementation.

6.5. Legislation is not required to implement these changes.

6.6. Upon redesignation from AFCESA to AFCEC, the FOA will be moved, without personnel and equipment, to Joint Base San Antonio (JBSA) – Lackland Air Force base

(AFB).

6.7. Tyndall AFB and JBSA – Lackland AFB will continue to host AFCEC operations as the primary locations.

6.8. The AFCEC will not assume transferred workload from the MAJCOMs or installations until the corresponding resources have transferred to the AFCEC or an MOU between existing AFCEE/AFRPA and the MAJCOMs is in place.

6.9. This PAD does not affect any programs for the Air National Guard (ANG), except funding associated with ERA, which will be centrally managed at the AFCEC.

6.10. The Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC) will continue to execute authority over its CE programs as required by 10 United States Code (USC) chapter 1803, 10 USC § 8038, 31 USC § 1301, and AFI 65-601V1. However, AFRC shall, unless prohibited by these legal and regulatory authorities, adhere to the processes, procedures and management principles detailed in this PAD. Appropriate MOUs will be prepared between AFCEE/AFRPA and AFRC to address statutory requirements and determine appropriate oversight for AFRC to conduct its fiduciary roles and responsibilities and to provide for greater overall efficiency for the Air Force. Funding associated with ERA will be centrally managed at the AFCEC.

6.11. Funding for AFCEC advisory and assistance services (A&AS) contractor support and temporary duty (TDY) travel will be limited to current baseline due to fiscal constraints and restrictions on outsourcing of government activities. Any decrease in these funding areas will directly decrease the AFCEC's capacity to support field units.

6.12. For the purpose of this PAD, direct reporting units (DRUs) with CE staffs and/or CE units will be treated as MAJCOMs.

6.13. The AFCEC personnel at JBSA – Lackland AFB will be serviced by a single personnel office. All AFCEC OLs will be serviced by the host installation personnel office.

6.14. Select CE positions across the enterprise will be acquisition coded in accordance with the Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act (DAWIA).

7.0 – GUIDANCE

7.1 Spiral 2 IOC date is 1 October 2012. In order to accomplish IOC, the following actions must be completed:

7.1.1 Sufficient AF/A7C personnel have been realigned to implement the organizational structure described in PAD 12-03 (Basic Plan, Appendix XIII).

7.1.2 Required personnel, administrative, and organizational actions to merge the functions of the CE FOAs have been completed, including unit redesignations, activations or inactivations, as necessary.

7.1.3 The AFCEC has established lines of command and control as well as the delegated authority to empower the AFCEC and its leadership to manage and execute the new program management structure for programs to-be assigned to the AFCEC, as well as having the minimum commensurate resources in-place or under control of the AFCEC to execute that management structure.

7.2 Spiral 3 IOC date is 1 October 2012. In order to accomplish IOC, the following action must be completed:

7.2.1 The AFCEC has established processes and procedures to centralize MAJCOM functions supporting EQ and NEPA programs, RP programs, MILCON design and construction and ERA activities.

7.3 Spiral 4 IOC date is 1 October 2012. In order to accomplish IOC, the following action must be completed:

7.3.1 All CESs and Groups have realigned personnel to implement the organizational structure described in PAD 12-03 (Basic Plan, Appendix XIII) and base level ERA activities. Final operating capability (FOC) for contracted squadrons (or portions of squadrons) that have undergone cost comparison under Office of Management & Budget (OMB) Circular A-76 and most efficient organization (MEO) units will be in accordance with (IAW) criteria outlined in section 7.8.

7.4 FOC for spirals 1, 2, and 3 is 1 October 2014, and FOC for spiral 4 is 1 October 2013.

FOC has been accomplished for all spirals when all personnel, administrative, and operational actions described in this PAD have been completed.

7.5 The AFCEC has direct liaison authorized (DIRLAUTH) or coordination authority with MAJCOMs and wing commanders for the purposes of collecting/compiling operational and financial data to assure compliance with appropriate directives and program guidance. Wing commanders may elect to give DIRLAUTH for much of the routine business to their CES commanders.

7.6 AFCEC and subordinate AFCEC Directors have DIRLAUTH with SAF/IE and subordinate DASs, to directly consult or coordinate an action with each other's respective organizations, with the requirement of keeping each organization's chain-of-command duly informed as appropriate. As defined in Joint Publication 1, DIRLAUTH is a coordination relationship. Any formal taskers or time sensitive requests should follow HAF workflow and task management tool protocols.

7.7 The CE reorganization applies to all joint bases where Air Force is either supporting (lead) or supported (where joint base MOA will allow or can be modified). For those responsibilities transferred to the AFCEC, new “on behalf of” relationships with the joint base commander will be documented in the respective joint base MOA. The joint base common output level standards (COLS) will continue to apply at the joint bases, but full attainment might be fiscally constrained. The AFCEC will be responsible for reporting their recurring COLS performance and annual COLS manpower and cost to the respective joint base commanders.

7.8 Reorganization applies to CE MEOs and contractor operations in the contracted squadrons (or portions of squadrons) that have undergone cost comparison under OMB Circular A-76. The implementation cost must be determined and deemed affordable.

The implementation timeline will be informed by contract modification requirements and cost.

7.9 It is imperative that all active duty CESs be organized to implement the best practice processes with the required best available information technology (IT) tools. An Inspector General (IG) Special Interest Item (SII) will be instituted to review reorganization and highlight problem areas.

7.10 This initiative must be accomplished within existing manpower resources and grades as outlined in the PAD. The detailed programming action (command identification code [CID], program element code [PEC], manpower category, FYs) will be included in Annex B, Appendix I. Any changes to General Officer (GO), Senior Executive Service (SES), Colonel, Chief Master Sergeant, and Senior Master Sergeant grades must be approved by AF/A1 or the Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force (CSAF).

7.11 The AFCEE and AFCESA individual mobilization augmentee (IMA) assets may be realigned within the AFCEC to meet the military requirements.

7.12 Manpower programming actions to reprogram end strength will be detailed in Annex B, Manpower and Personnel.

7.13 Organizational Changes:

7.13.1 Redesignate the AFCESA as the AFCEC, effective 1 October 2012 at JBSA – Lackland

AFB, TX.

7.13.2 Inactivate the AFCEE and the AFRPA effective 1 October 2012.

7.13.3 Variances to the MAJCOM CE staff organization structure should be submitted by the MAJCOM/A1M to AF/A7C with an information copy provided to AF/A1MO.

Variances to the standard CES structure shown in Appendix XVI will be submitted to AF/A1MO as an organization change request, in accordance with AFI 38-101, chapter 6.

7.13.4 Variances to the squadron structures below flight level and group/directorate structures will be submitted by the MAJCOM A7, A4/7, or A6/7 after coordination with the MAJCOM/A1M as appropriate, to AF/A7C with an information copy provided to

APPENDIX I: GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE

TO

BASIC PLAN

HQ USAF PAD 12-03

1.0 CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS:

1.1. The IGS (Figure 2) is a methodical 3-tier, hierarchical development, review, validation, and approval process for near and long term installation investment planning.

Figure 2. IGS

1.2. The IGS is comprised of three main deliberative bodies designed to integrate investment requirements and opportunities into an approved, two-year execution plan;

the AFCAMP. The IGS also serves to inform planning by providing the ability to inform, shape, and forecast future installation investment requirements represented in AFAMPs expected as a result of changes in/or impacts of external environmental factors, fiscal constraints, laws, and regulations, Air Force vision, Air Force mission, Air Force/OSD/Federal strategic initiatives, AF COLS, and current mission requirements.

2.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES:

2.1. IEC:

2.1.1. Co-Chairs: AF/A4/7, SAF/IE.

2.1.2. Participants: AF/A7C, SAF/IEE, SAF/IEI, SAF/IEN, AFCEC Director.

2.1.3. Advisors: SAF/AQ, SAF/FM, SAF/GC, AF/JA, SAF/SB, ACS CFLI, MAJCOM vice commanders (CV) (representing MAJCOM equity and CFLI role; biennially).

2.1.4. Provides strategic guidance, priorities, vision, and vectors to ensure Air Force installation complex viability.

2.1.5. Incorporates decisions from various executive steering groups (ESG) and other strategic guidance to shape strategic direction of installation investment.

2.1.6. Develops policies, guidance, and instructions, IAW Headquarters Air Force Mission Directive (HAFMD) 1-18 and HAFMD1-38, to define and transmit process and procedures for lower echelons to meet strategic vision and goals.

2.1.7. Reviews and provides strategic direction to influence the AFAMPs and use in the planning, programming, budgeting, and execution (PPBE) process.

2.1.8. This is the council where MAJCOM CVs can appeal MAJCOM prioritization in AFCAMP based on MAJCOM commander (CC) assessment of “Risk to Airmen and Mission.”

2.1.9. Conducts program management reviews (PMRs).

2.2. CEC:

2.2.1. Co-Chairs: AF/A7C (approval authority); SAF/IEI co-chairs on issues that originate from the I2G; otherwise SAF/IEI is a participant.

2.2.2. Participants: AFCEC Director, SAF/IEE, SAF/IEI, SAF/IEN, Installation Support Panel (ISP) Chair, CFLI (Rep), AFCEC Planning & Integration (P&I) Director, and MAJCOM A7 or A4/7 or A6/7 as applicable (delegable to the MAJCOM/CE).

2.2.3. Advisors: SAF/SB, SAF/AQ, SAF/FM, SAF/GC, AF/JA.

2.2.4. Develops operational and execution plans to support Air Force strategic vision and priorities.

2.2.5. Ensures the AFCAMP is aligned with the IEC vision, ESG directions, and other strategic guidance.

2.2.6. Balances financial and risk decisions.

2.2.7. Approves AFCAMP (two year investment plan).

2.2.8. Reviews/Approves AFAMP (FYDP Requirements Plan), supporting POM development.

2.2.9. Receives regular PMRs, at least semi-annually, from the AFCEC and adjusts execution plans, as necessary.

2.2.10. Supports enterprise-wide resource advocacy through the POM build and the ISP.

2.2.11. This is the council where MAJCOM A7, A4/7, or A6/7 as appropriate (delegable to the MAJCOM/CE), can appeal MAJCOM prioritization in AFCAMP based on MAJCOM CC assessment of “Risk to Airmen and Mission.”

2.3. I2G:

2.3.1. Chair: AFCEC Director (approval authority).

2.3.2. Participants: AFCEC Product Line Directors (Centers of Excellence (CoE) and Directorate Leaders), AMP/CAMP Portfolio Managers, AMP Integrators, MAJCOM Representatives.

2.3.3. Advisors: SAF/AQ, SAF/FM, SAF/GC, SAF/SB, AF/JA.

2.3.4. Develops AFAMP (FYDP Requirements Plan) from combined submittal of installations as submitted through the MAJCOMs.

2.3.5. Integrates all “Product Line” requirements, opportunities, and initiatives into supporting AFCAMP; integrates MAJCOM Comprehensive Asset Management Plan (MCAMP).

2.3.6. Ensures investment plan is aligned with CEC and IEC vision.

2.3.7. Recommends “risk” and funding decisions.

2.3.8. Provides regular updates to CEC.

2.3.9. Reviews and approves final IPL for review and approval by the CEC.

2.3.10. Provides guidance on plans, programs, scoring model (e.g., IPLs).

2.3.11. Reviews recommendations from CE Group/Program Groups as to recommendations for prioritization of CE investments.

3.0 BATTLE RHYTHM

3.1. The cycle of meetings and activities of the IGS synchronizes current and forecasts future requirements; providing:

3.1.1. Approval of AFCAMP to support two year execution plan.

3.1.2. Submittal of approved AFAMP to inform the PPBE process.

3.1.3. Incorporation of strategic guidance from various strategic working groups, steering groups, and councils into near and long term investment plans.

3.1.4. PMRs at least semi-annually to inform the IEC.

3.1.5. HAF to MAJCOM updates as required to inform MAJCOMs on program effectiveness and attainment of metrics.

Figure 3. IGS Battle Rhythm

Note: The timing of the specific actions identified in the IGS Battle Rhythm will change as the investment planning process continues to evolve.

APPENDIX II: STRATEGIC INTEGRATION AND COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING

TO

1.1. The Air Force will provide a centralized comprehensive planning capability to include an integrated investment planning capability. This combined capability provides the expertise and processes required to integrate Air Force enterprise-wide built and natural asset portfolio management and decision support based on targets and measures derived from strategic policy, guidance, and mission requirements and aligning those requirements into AMPs and short term (two year) investment execution strategies.

This capability also provides direct mission support by identifying and addressing risks to installation and mission viability, sustainability, and execution through implementation of the following programs: Comprehensive planning, encroachment management, environmental impact analysis process (EIAP), community noise program, and air installation compatible use zone (AICUZ) program. This capability presents a major change by combining strategic, operational, and installation (tactical) planning capabilities with requirements definition and prioritization capabilities to provide a capability to create, analyze, and integrate investment plans.

1.2. The planning and investment strategy development process (Figure 4) requires an understanding of the internal and external drivers (e.g., fiscal, political, legal, environmental, threat, mission) affecting the Air Force mission and its installations.

The process is iterative and allows for adjustment as new requirements and initiatives are identified. Collaboration among all stakeholders is critical and accomplished by participating in various cross-functional teams, working groups, and councils with Air Force, Joint, Federal Agency, private, and public partners to produce strategies to meet organizational goals and ultimately shape guidance and policy. These policies, guidance, and goals will in turn give direction to a range of plans, processes, and products providing the basic foundation for identifying current and future requirements to support mission sustainability, flexibility, and suitability.

1.3. The planning and investment strategy development process uses standardized and comprehensive information complemented by data sets from the installation development plans (IDPs); current RP data; space optimization analysis; community encroachment management/AICUZ/environmental; built and natural infrastructure assessments; facility/RP/infrastructure/mission requirements; both investment and divestiture opportunities; initiatives and existing capacities to name just a few. The process provides planners and investment analysis specialists, enabled through an IT capability, the necessary information to build and analyze COAs/alternatives to match solutions to requirements resulting in effective and efficient investment plans. This process supports the built and natural infrastructure life-cycle business model (plan, program, design, construct, operate, maintain, and divest).

Figure 4. Planning and Investment Strategy Development Process

1.4. Knowledge of the external drivers can affect current and future installation requirements and will be used to shape and inform the AFAMPs. The AFAMPs provide an un-prioritized five to seven year forecast of installation investment requirements for installation complexes across the Air Force enterprise. Requirements in AMPs feed into the CAMPs.

1.5. The AFCAMP provides a two year investment plan which links requirements to solutions and then prioritizes these solutions based on available resources and exploitable opportunities such as enhanced use leases (EUL) and other land transactions.

1.6. The AFCAMP is developed sequentially starting at the installation level with the Base comprehensive activity management plans (BCAMP). These BCAMPs provide IPLs of executable solutions to the requirements which are then merged into a single integrated

MCAMP.

1.7. The MAJCOM submits the MCAMPs to the AFCEC for validation and integration.

This sequential investment plan development process ensures the final AFCAMP has been integrated, validated, and de-conflicted; ready for approval. The portfolio management process provides synergy among the various CE investment and product/service lines to meet the Air Force vision and mission.

1.8. Portfolio management includes analysis and centralized management of requirements, projects, or programs based on numerous key characteristics to achieve an approved LoS at an acceptable cost, in support of the mission. This typically includes identifying, prioritizing, and authorizing projects and programs to achieve specific strategic objectives and identify opportunities to fill capability gaps. The objective of portfolio management is to determine the optimal mix and sequencing of proposed projects to best achieve the Air Force’s overall mission goals—typically expressed in terms of hard economic measures, mission related strategy goals, or technical strategy goals, while honoring compliance constraints or targets imposed by leadership or internal/external real-world factors.

1.9. Upon approval through the IGS (Appendix I) the AFCAMP is released for execution of centralized programs by the AFCEC in coordination with the MAJCOMs and installations as dictated by specific program. Execution methods include capabilities at the installation, MAJCOM, AFCEC or through third-party agencies (e.g., United States Army Corps of Engineers [USACE], Naval Facilities Engineering Command [NAVFAC]) IAW environmental law, legal statutes, regulation, and policy. The remaining list of time phased requirements, initiatives, and opportunities (e.g., AFAMPs) remain in a feedback loop with the Air Force’s PPBE cycle through the ISP.

This sets the stage for the next round of AFAMPs validation and AFCAMP development.

1.10. Comprehensive planning establishes a systematic framework for informing decision-making on the physical development of Air Force installations and its environments. It provides an integrated context and advocacy for the multiple Air Force processes supporting and sustaining current and future missions. It relies on active Air Force stakeholder participation in the development of sustainable plans and promotes compliance with applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and policies.

1.11. The IDP is the product of the installation comprehensive planning process. The IDP link to asset management process is through the IDP’s capital improvements plan. The capital improvements plan identifies development actions needed to support current and projected mission informing the AMP cycle. As the AMP process proceeds from the AFAMP, to current-year execution, changes in anticipated and actual resource allocation can impact the IDP when proposed projects are or are not funded. These changes, in addition to the insertion of unanticipated requirements resulting from near-term mission changes and/or other legislation or regulatory change, can drive changes in proposed project scope or timing. Consequently, the IDP must be continually evaluated and revised to reflect changing priorities and fiscal constraints.

1.12. Encroachment management: Preserving the long term capability of our installations to support current and future missions is critical. Development both within and without the installation complex can have detrimental impacts to our ability to carry out our mission. The Air Force encroachment management capability builds on existing programs designed to address encroachment issues and identifies new programs and issues that must be addressed.