Winter 00-01...Title: Winter 00-01.pmd Author: James.Cline Created Date: 4/17/2003 5:55:57 PM

The Civil Engineer - United States Air ForceThe Civil Engineer - United States Air Force

For Peat’s Sake!Firefighters Battle Stubborn Bog Fire

Maj Gen Earnest O. Robbins IIThe Air Force Civil Engineer

FR

OM

TH

E T

OP

Linking Planning to PLinking Planning to PLinking Planning to PLinking Planning to PLinking Planning to Programmingrogrammingrogrammingrogrammingrogramming

What will the Air Force be like in the year 2010?2025? Will we still be an “expeditionary” Air Force?Will we have more unmanned aerial vehicles and fewerpilots? Will we have more space launch infrastructure?What is the TEMPER tent of the future? Will thecurrent structure of our civil engineer squadrons beappropriate, or do we need to reorganize? What is thegap between where we are now and where we want tobe?

To be relevant in tomorrow’s Air Force, we mustunderstand how our service will evolve and modernizeand develop plans to keep pace with this change. Wheredo we need to be in 10 years, or in 25 years, and how dowe get there? The newly released Civil Engineer StrategicPlan (CESP), Volume 2, Mission and Modernization,guides the way for our efforts. Coupled with Volume I ofthe CESP, Future Security Environment and PlanningImplications, it lays the framework for modernizationplans within our five civil engineer core competencies:installation engineering, expeditionary engineering,emergency services, environmental leadership and housing excellence.

How will we connect the plan to our programs? Volume 2 gets down to the nitty-gritty of where we’regoing. It outlines our vision and establishes a process for moving our organization from where we are nowto where we want to be in the year 2025. It identifies gaps between this current and future state, and callsfor the establishment of process action teams to review and validate the gaps, develop modernization plansto close those gaps, and establish performance measures to track progress against plans. Our Air Staffdivision chiefs, as champions of our core competencies, will lead the way through an IPT process with fullrepresentation from the MAJCOMs and squadrons.

Language from our CESP and our core competencies was extracted “verbatim” and placed in theAnnual Planning and Programming Guidance (APPG) to show the linkage between our planning andprogramming efforts. Without an adequate planning process that helps us articulate our requirements, wecannot expect much support during the programming process. By keeping these two processes closelylinked we can also better measure our successes and failures.

Copies of Volume II were provided to the major commands in January for distribution. Read it,understand it and use it in your own planning efforts.

Predict the future we can’t, but as Air Force civil engineers we must understand our role in tomorrow’sAir Force. To do that, we must study, understand and support the Air Force vision and strategic plan.

A Playground for Peaceby MSgt Bob HaskellAir National Guard and Reserve U.S. Marine Corpsmembers improve play opportunities for Macedonianchildren during a Cornerstone 2000-3 deployment.

Also in this issue:A Total Force Base ........................................................ 7Unit Spotlight: 90th CES .............................................. 72000 CE Worldwide Conference ...................................11Views From the Field: Confined Space Awareness .......16The Challenge of Change: CE FinancialManagers Meet in Colorado Springs ...........................262000 Chief Master Sergeant-Selects .............................282000 Major-Selects .......................................................28Civil Engineer Senior Officers and Civilians .................32

CONTENTSCONTENTSCONTENTSCONTENTSCONTENTS

12

Military Airfield Revivalby 1st Lt Eric H. MannionAn Air National Guard training mission lands REDHORSE in Doha, Qatar, to renovate Camp Snoopy.

A Balancing Actby CMSgt Myrl Kibbe and Mike GelsleichterThe Air Force Enlisted Grades Allocation Program isdesigned to balance the size and structure of the civilengineer enlisted workforce.

The U.S. Air Force Civil Engineer

Winter 00-01 Volume 8, Number 4

The Civil EngineerMaj Gen Earnest O. Robbins II

AFCESA CommanderCol Bruce R. Barthold

Chief, Professional CommunicationsLois Walker

EditorLetha Cozart

Graphics/Production EditorDemetress Lovett-West

The Civil Engineer is published quarterly as afunded newspaper by the Professional Commu-nications staff at the Air Force Civil EngineerSupport Agency, Tyndall AFB, Fla. This publica-tion serves the Office of The Civil Engineer, HQU.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C. Readers maysubmit articles, photographs and art work. Sug-gestions and criticisms are welcomed. All pho-tos are U.S. Air Force, unless otherwise noted.Contents of The Civil Engineer are not neces-sarily the official views of, or endorsed by, theU.S. Government, the Defense Department orthe Department of the Air Force. Editorial office:The Civil Engineer, AFCESA/PCT, 139 BarnesDrive Suite 1, Tyndall AFB, Fla., 32403-5319,Telephone (850) 283-6242, DSN 523-6242,FAX (850) 283-6499, and e-mail: [email protected]. All submissions will be editedto conform to standards set forth in Air ForceInstruction 35-301 and The Associated PressStylebook. The Civil Engineer magazine canbe found on the Internet on AFCESA’s homepage: https://www.afcesa.af.mil.

Bogged Downby TSgt Michael A. WardFirefighters work to extinguish an underground fireburning in a peat bog on Vandenberg Air Force Base,Calif.

On the cover ...

17

Departments

Topnotch Trainingby TSgt Steven E. SandyRED HORSE and Prime BEEF teams improveinstructional facilities at Fort Leonard Wood, Mo.

CE World ..................... 22CE People ..................... 27

Firefighters use a watercannon to soak the groundwhere an underground peatbog fire burns on VandenbergAir Force Base, Calif. (Photoby SSgt Janice H. Cannon)

8

15

20

A Steady State of ReadinessIn an interview with The CE magazine, Col J. Carlton Tickeldescribes some of the interesting and exciting challengesAir Force Space Command civil engineers encounter.

4 Please send story ideas,articles, photos, commentsand suggestions to our newe-mail address:[email protected]

4 The CE Winter 00-01

The CE: How do Air Force Space Command civil engineerssupport the warfighter?

Col Tickel: Our civil engineers are very much a part of the AEF[Aerospace Expeditionary Force]. Air Force Space Commandcivil engineers deploy to the same locations as the othercommands. At five of our main bases and the headquarters wehave multiple Prime BEEF UTCs [unit type codes], includingfirefighters and explosive ordnance disposal, that supporttheater commanders and their war plans. We support every oneof the unified commands, and we support other agenciessimultaneously, such as the National Security Agency. We alsosupport the theater commanders-in-chief with in-place forces ateight main bases and about 125 sites worldwide.

AFSPC is quite unique in that we have three separate anddistinct missions. We have the nuclear deterrent mission withour intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), which are the AirForce’s and the nation’s biggest bullet, so to speak. We aredefinitely a warfighting command in that sense, with our forcesdeployed at Malmstrom, Minot and F.E. Warren Air Force bases.

The second mission we have is space launch at CapeCanaveral/Patrick and Vandenberg AFBs. They don’t have arocket being launched every day, but there are a lot of excitingthings going on daily in preparation for multimillion dollarmissions that are absolutely critical to our nation’s defense.

The third piece of the AFSPC mission, which is atCheyenne Mountain Air Station and Peterson, Schriever andBuckley AFBs, and many sites around the world, involves spacesurveillance, space control, initial tactical warning and tacticalassessment for incoming ICBMs or sea-launched ballisticmissiles.

So we have the readiness mission, like other commands,

and lots of locations, like other commands. AFSPC is the fourthlargest command in the Air Force in terms of facilities, and we arespread out world wide, which creates a challenge for ourheadquarters staff at Peterson. All of our missions are,essentially, 24 hour-a-day, seven day-a-week, 365 day-a-yearmissions. Our mission doesn’t stop; it doesn’t fly away. It isvery rewarding, and lots of fun.

The CE: Peterson AFB will soon be home to a new U.S. SpaceCommand/ NORAD [North American Aerospace DefenseCommand] headquarters and an Army Space Commandheadquarters. How are AFSPC civil engineers involved in theconstruction of this consolidated military complex?

Col Tickel: U.S. Space Command is growing. It’s a unifiedcommand with Army, Navy and Air Force components. The AirForce component is Fourteenth Air Force, headquartered atVandenberg. We provide support to them through policy andguidance. The Army Space Command component is already inColorado Springs in leased facilities. Naval Space Command alsohas a large presence in Colorado Springs. Its headquarters is inDahlgren, Va.

The two new buildings and the existing AFSPCHeadquarters building will form an ellipse — a space complex,so to speak — on Peterson. Construction is going on right now.It will be finished in late 2002. It will house about 700 Army folksand about 900 U.S. Space Command and NORAD folks.

Col J. Carlton Tickel is the Air Force Space Command Civil Engineer, Headquarters AFSPC, Peterson Air Force Base, Colo. In thisinterview with The CE magazine, the colonel describes some of the exciting and unique challenges his civil engineers take on in a commandwhere they “fly” missiles and satellites instead of airplanes. With sites all over the world, the sun never sets on AFSPC or its civil engineermission, providing …

A Steady Stateof Readiness

Col J. Carlton Tickel

The CE Winter 00-01 5

As far as I know, this is the first project of its kind where theArmy and the Air Force have partnered to build an Armybuilding and an Air Force (Joint Command Headquarters)building simultaneously under the same contract, versusseparate contracts. The Corps of Engineers is responsible for it,with us. It’s a unique partnership.

The management team responsible for this includes a four-star, General [Ralph E.] Eberhart, commander of U.S. SpaceCommand, NORAD and Air Force Space Command, plus fourthree-stars, plus the program management office. There is about$65 million dollars in construction, plus another $40 to 50 millionin communications, and another $30 to 40 million in systems andmission communications, all being integrated in oneconstruction effort.

The CE: Did you use the pre-wiring concept for the building, orwas that included in the MILCON?

Col Tickel: Absolutely. It’s essential and it has been workedfrom the get-go. Standard pre-wiring is really pretty easy for us.It’s the pre-wiring of the mission systems and how all that links,and all the links that go out to places all over the world thatwe’re working with. Also, the Command just awarded a $1.2billion integrated communications support contract forupgrading all of the mission support equipment that will operateover the next 10 years. We’re building a new system with state-of-the-art technology that has to be integrated into that, too,and the space operations center for U.S. Space Command andNORAD is the first piece of that to be integrated.

The CE: What is the significance of the redesignation andrealignment of Buckley AFB, Colo., as a Space Command base?

Col Tickel: As a little bit of history, Buckley was formerly anAir National Guard base and had been for quite a while. But theAir Guard wasn’t manned, nor necessarily resourced or trained,to run the day-to-day base operating support mission there. TheAFSPC mission at Buckley, plus other missions associated withit, continued to grow and were very hi-tech. As a consequence,standard base operating support, including civil engineering,services and communications, just couldn’t keep up.

Then, when Lowry AFB and Fitzsimons Army Post closed,it created a void in the Denver area. Many, like the DefenseAccounting and Finance Center and the Air Reserve PersonnelCenter, remained on Lowry proper, and there were others in theDenver area. About four years ago, AFSPC was given theresponsibility for supporting all active duty military in Denver. Ifsomebody needs to get a base decal, etc., they go to Buckley.

The Secretary of the Air Force visited a couple years agoand said, “We need to do a better job of supporting our activeduty personnel — Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. We’regoing to make Buckley an Air Force Base.” We did that effective1 October 2000. On 1 October 2001, we will stand up an air basewing with all the assorted units under it. We don’t know whatthe unit designations will be yet, but it will probably be the 351stAir Base Wing. It will have a civil engineering squadron under it,just like every other wing. We’ll make it a full-up Air Force base

to support all of the Denver area folks, along with those onBuckley.

The CE: What challenges do you face with missile fielddeactivation? We understand you’ve had success at GrandForks AFB, N.D.

Col Tickel: Missile field deactivation is not new business. Itwas done at Whiteman and Ellsworth AFBs, and Grand Forkshas just followed on. We have 150 missile silos and 15 missilealert facilities to go. Particularly with the missile silos, we have aSTART [Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty] agreement timelinewe must meet. All of our 150 silos must be deactivated byimplosion by December 2001.

When we say we do away with a missile warhead, we doaway with the launch capability, too. So you destroy it, and thenprove it’s destroyed to your counterpart. When we blow up asilo, we leave it open for 90 days for treaty verification. That canbe either on-site visual inspection by a Russian treaty group oroversight through satellite visual. After 90 days, we can clean itup, fill the hole, overseed it, and sell or give back the land. Weare also dealing with any environmental concerns.

The CE: What types of issues arise when dealing with launchfacilities at Cape Canaveral Air Station and Vandenberg AFB?

Col Tickel: Cape Canaveral and Vandenberg are two uniqueplaces in the Air Force. Not only do we launch military rocketswith military satellites out of them, but we also launchcommercial rockets with commercial satellites. Those are theonly two places in the United States that can do that.

As a consequence, we deal with commercial customers allthe time. These are some of the nation’s biggest defense firms,such as Boeing and Lockheed-Martin. We have to deal in analmost business-like fashion at those two places in the way werun things, even though we are a military organization.

We run the launch sites and we run the downrange trackingstations. Each coast has its own unique capability. Where youwant to launch a satellite, how high it needs to be, and whetherit goes over the polar region or whether it goes geosynchronous[rotates with the earth] dictates what coast you launch from.

Right now, the Air Force is responsible for launchcapabilities and the land and facilities associated with it, exceptfor the EELV, Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle, which will becommercial.

Several years ago the Air Force awarded two contracts, oneto Boeing and one to Lockheed-Martin. We gave a half-billiondollars to each of them to build both a heavy launch capabilityand a medium-light launch capability at Vandenberg and CapeCanaveral.

We have licensed the area to them, and Boeing andLockheed-Martin are constructing their own launch facilities,investing several billion dollars apiece. They will run andoperate the launch sites . The first couple of launches,particularly for Cape Canaveral, should be in 2002. They will becommercial launches. In 2003 or 2004, there should be somemilitary satellite launches at Vandenberg.


The effort there is to reduce 25 to 50 percent of the overalllaunch cost to the federal government, particularly theDepartment of Defense. The way we have awarded some of thesatellite launch contracts, we believe we will achieve that. Itremains to be seen, but I think it is a pretty good idea.

Regarding facility maintenance, each of the bases is uniqueand each of the launch pads and associated facilities are uniqueto that particular system. Each takes quite a bit of differentmaintenance. At Cape Canaveral we have a base operatingsupport contract that takes care not only of the operations oflaunching rockets, but also base operating support for thelaunch gantries and associated facilities for building up therockets and satellites.

The CE: What are some of the environmental challenges facingAFSPC in the area of wildlife protection?

Col Tickel: Vandenberg, in particular, is one of the few pristinebeach areas left in all of California. There are 38 miles ofshoreline. As a consequence, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife agencylooks to Vandenberg to protect certain species, because it’s toolate in other areas where houses are built up and down thecoastline.

The snowy plover, a threatened and endangered species, ison Vandenberg. What the Fish and Wildlife agency wants is forVandenberg to maintain the habitat so these birds don’t die off.They want us to close off the beach area to everyone, all 38miles of it, during the mating season, which is March throughNovember. The trouble is, not only are the beaches not fullyopen to the base, but they are also not fully open to the localcommunity. Access to the beaches is important to our peopleand the local communities.

We are consulting with Fish and Wildlife now on what theproper plan is for the future. We totally agree that we want toprotect endangered species, but we need to have some beacharea open for our people and for the local population. There is ahealthy debate, but it is a good debate and part of theenvironmental rules and laws we abide by.

The CE: There is also a National Marine Sanctuary proposal toexpand control of waters adjacent to Vandenberg. How will thataffect the mission there?

Col Tickel: There is an existing sanctuary area, and theDepartment of Defense has an exemption exclusion clauseassociated with the area’s rules. We can launch for nationalmilitary missions and it is not a problem. The situation is, theywant to control what goes in the area, whether it’s boats orairplanes, or in our case, rockets. Rocket launches spew debris.Some of the propellant may drop into the sea. Not much may fall,but some folks feel that any amount that falls into the sea is toomuch. They want, at least initially, not to have DoD exclusion.Would they limit us to one rocket launch a year? If so, thatmeans Vandenberg would no longer be an acceptable location.

Vandenberg is the only place in the U.S. that launches polarsatellites. Those are vital to communications, not just military,but civilian. If they give us a DoD exclusion for military

satellites, but not for commercial satellites, that could createnational economic problems. We are currently working withthem on what kind of exclusion we should have.

The CE: As the Air Force moves along the fast track to privatizeutilities, how is this playing out in Space Command?

Col Tickel: Utilities privatization in Space Command, just as inevery other command, is creating some very awkward andunique challenges. We are evaluating whether this makes senseto do or not.

We have several “Pathfinder bases”. One is Peterson AFB.There, we are dealing sole source with Colorado SpringsUtilities. The reason it is sole source is because 90 percent ofPeterson’s land is leased from the City of Colorado Springs.Typically, utilities privatization turns over all the utility systems,the lines, and gives easements to the company or utility service.In this case they already have the “easements” so we didn’tneed to do that. Plus, they already own about 30 percent of theutility lines on base, because the lines run through the base toother places. It is kind of unique.

The other Pathfinder is Cape Canaveral/Patrick AFB. Thereit’s primarily water, wastewater and electricity, whereas inColorado Springs we are doing these and natural gas. Patrick/Cape Canaveral is kind of unique in that we are dealing solesource with Florida Power and Light. We have no bids yet. Wedon’t know whether this will work. Initial indications are that itmay. We will wait and see.

The CE: Space Command’s A-76 program has been around longenough that it’s time to recompete. How is that progressing? Isthe program working for Space Command?

Col Tickel: We have our fair share of A-76’d organizations. Weare doing some re-competing and we have done a fair number ofthose that went contract originally. Just about all of them endedup costing us more money. We have a few that were won asMEOs [most efficient organizations] and are just coming up for are-compete at the five-year point. Have the requirementschanged? Has the MEO changed? Has the performance workstatement changed? We are working on how to do this.

We have five bases, Peterson, Malmstrom, Vandenberg,Patrick, and F.E. Warren, where we have UTCs. We have alreadyA-76’d pieces of those, and have no more scheduled to gothrough the process. Just like every other base with UTCs, wehave reached the limit of what we can do. We will not do anymore unless the Air Force changes the two major theater warconcept.

Many of our sites are already contracted out and will staythat way, which is probably a good thing. If we didn’t contractthem out, we would have military doing lots of remotes. Anytime we can reduce the number of remotes for our military folks,we will.

Editor’s Note: Colonel Tickel culminates five years as theAFSPC Civil Engineer in March. He is now serving as SpecialAssistant to the Vice Commander, AFSPC.


Additional Accomplishments: Warren has one of the mostprogressive natural resource management programs of anymilitary installation, including involvement with internationalendangered species recovery efforts. In the spring of 2000, ateam of federal and state wildlife biologists captured over adozen newly born fawns from the base’s resident populationof Pronghorn Antelope. The fawns were then flown to Mexicoand used in captive breeding and rearing efforts forendangered Peninsular Pronghorn, found only in Mexico andone of the most endangered mammals in North America. Theseunique efforts with wildlife biologists from other nations tohelp recover endangered species are a positive reflection onthe U.S. Air Force and a demonstration of a first classinternational partnering program.

The warriors of the 90th CES are also well prepared tosupport worldwide contingencies. In May 2000, Warren civilengineers led the team representing Air Force Space Commandin Readiness Challenge VII. By the time the competition dustsettled, the Mighty Ninety team had won four team categoriesand the Brig General William T. Meredith trophy for “Best inAF.” It was the first Readiness Challenge win for AFSPC.

This year the 90th CES was recognized as having the bestReadiness and Resources Flights in AFSPC. The squadronalso played an important role in the selection of F.E. Warren asthe command’s 2000 Installation Excellence Award winner.

Unit Name: 90th Civil Engineer Squadron Parent Unit: 90thSpace Wing Location: F. E. Warren Air Force Base, Wyo.Commander: Lt Col Carlos Cruz-Gonzalez AssignedPersonnel: 188 military, 174 civilians, 100 contractors Mission:Support the Mighty Ninety by providing quality emergencyservices, facilities and infrastructure through teamwork.

Unique Requirements: F. E. Warren AFB, established in 1867,is the oldest operating Air Force base in the country. The basecontains more than 214 historic buildings and nearly 150prehistoric and historic archeological sites. Warren is listed onthe National Register of Historic Places and is a NationalHistoric Landmark. Although Warren is the oldest operatingbase, it hosts the world’s most modern intercontinentalballistic missile force — 150 Minuteman III and 50 Peacekeepermissiles.

The base’s landmark status presents special challengesfor the 90th CES. Facility maintenance and repair activitiesmust meet stringent special standards set by the Departmentof the Interior, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservationand the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office. Thesespecial requirements drive the cost of operations approximate-ly 20 percent higher compared to more modern installations.

A “Total Force” BaseThe Air National Guard’s first base began as Buckley

Field, a World War II Army Air Forces auxiliary field, thenspent several years under Navy command as Naval Air Sta-tion Denver. It returned to the Air Force in 1959 and grew intoa thriving Air National Guard base where active duty person-nel eventually outnumbered members of the Guard.

Buckley’s latest transformation, to active duty Air Forcebase, culminated with a ceremony October 2nd that markedits transfer from the Colorado Air National Guard’s 140thWing to Air Force Space Command’s 821st Space Group.

Civil engineering was involved in negotiations over thetransition, the status of the base and how AFSPC would takeover facilities planning.

According to Air National Guard Lt Col Tom Stanley,commander, 140th Civil Engineer Squadron, the base will op-erate as a typical active duty base where the Guard (Armyand Air) is a tenant, except for airfield operations, which willremain under operational control of the Colorado Air NationalGuard.

“During this year of transition, both active duty andguard civil engineering operations will be working together toaddress the needs of the base population,” said Stanley.

“Track-ing of man-power andmaterials foraccounting of Guardresource expendituresis required due to theshare of cost as-sumed by the State ofColorado under aMaster CooperativeAgreement (MCA)between the NationalGuard and Colorado.Agreements for utilityuse and common support services are still being finalized asthe final facility usage for the Guard and Air Force is workedout.”

The National Guard will continue to operate and maintainthe facilities associated with support of the Guard missions atBuckley AFB. — editor (Historical data compiled from AirForce Space Command News Service releases)

“Ready to Respond, Eager to Perform”

(Above) Buckley returned to the Air Force in1959 as an Air National Guard base. (Inset)Buckley became the first base to display thenew Air Force symbol. (Historical photocourtesy Colorado Air National Guard)


by 1st Lt Eric H. Mannion201st RHF

When I was informed that my unit was to deploy to CampSnoopy in Doha, Qatar, my first thought was … Where? Asidefrom hearing the name of the country a few times during theGulf War, I knew little to nothing about it. In any event, thisdeployment seemed as though it might turn out to be one of

our most challenging and productive training missions.

RED HORSE at the ReadyIn light of the relative threat in the Middle East, Camp

Snoopy (located at Doha International Airport) has sufferedfrom stresses related to the many deployments the locationhas seen since the Gulf War. Furthermore, the area’s extreme

climate was taking its toll. Enter the 200th REDHORSE Squadron and its sister unit, the 201stRED HORSE Flight.

We were tasked with bringing CampSnoopy some desperately needed TLC andproviding a securable location in accordancewith standing force protection operationsorders. As it turned out, this was no smallundertaking. We were presented with more than15 individual projects ranging from theconstruction of a Base Defense OperationsCenter to the installation and repair of anexisting counter-mobility berm, defensivefighting positions, overwatch towers androadways.

Typical Air National Guard RED HORSEtraining missions aren’t quite like this one. Thenormal course of events involves the AirNational Guard Readiness Center, ACC andsubsequent tasking messages that link us toour annual training. This time the customer, the820th Security Forces Group, came looking forus based on our reputation. From the beginningwe were offered full ownership of the project.We were simply given the programmingdocuments for the projects, a few customer

Military AirfieldRevival

RED HORSE providespeacetime engineer

support to Camp Snoopy

Crosser Boulevard was constructed to redirect vehicle search area traffic atCamp Snoopy, Qatar. RED HORSE units completed construction despite 120-degree temperatures. (Photos courtesy 200th/201st RED HORSE)

Vehicle maintenance activities were pivotal to the success of the mission. Here, MSgtMichael Bomberger, 201st RHF, provides verbal instructions as SSgts Daryl Walters andGregory Findings, 200th RHS, perform repairs to a heat-stricken bulldozer.


requirements, and a blank slate. The rest was up tous to make it happen.

Working the PlanAn initial project coordination meeting between

the 200th/201st RHS, ANGRC, 820th SFG, and U. S.Central Command Air Forces (USCENTAF) staff washeld in November 1999. Discussion topics at themeeting included typical deployment issues: whopays for the construction, per diem, billeting,security, airlift, etc. A basic timeline for the projectwas laid out and tentative deployment dates for five17-day, 50-man deployments were scheduled forMarch through May of 2000. This left us with threemonths to put the whole show together. Needless tosay, the logistics of moving approximately 250personnel and related construction equipment fromseveral different locations, in the relatively shortamount of time available, posed quite a challenge.

Design of the projects was initiated using pre-engineered buildings (PEBs) purchased in-country and erectedby 200th/201st personnel. The design and research processwas initiated and, after three to four weeks, the PEB conceptwas dropped due to unavoidable delays in procurement andcontracting of the structures. This placed us in yet anotherchallenging situation and reduced our timeline by anothermonth.

The pressure was now on to come up with a soundengineering plan to meet the needs of the customers and therelated force protection operations orders. We decided toapproach the facility projects using modified K-Spans insteadof PEBs. Initial design concepts were beginning to come

together and the site survey for the project was nearingquickly. We then experienced a typical delay associated withdeployments of this size: airlift.

The project timeline would have to be shifted to improveour chances of acquiring the airlift support we needed.Moving our equipment into the theater would require a C-5,and C-5s are always in demand. At first most of us felt wewould have more than enough time to prepare, but then realityhit. Shifting the schedule would place us in Qatar in the Mayto August timeframe. The later deployments would occurduring the hottest part of the year. This in itself wasdiscouraging. We had an aggressive schedule to begin with

and now we were adding the additionalstress associated with working in extremetemperatures. Temperatures in Qatarduring July and August can be as high as135 degrees Fahrenheit. The RED HORSEadage “Work Hard, Play Hard” wasstarting to take on a whole new meaning.

On March 26 a site survey teamdeployed to Camp Snoopy to take a lookat the project first-hand. The teamconsisted of key 200th and 201stpersonnel as well as representatives fromthe 820th SFG, USCENTAF civilengineering and contractingrepresentatives. Overall project goals andpriorities were addressed. Meetings withrepresentatives from the U.S. Embassywere completed, material and equipmentavailability was researched, and projectdesigns were finalized.

The site survey team gathered theapplicable project site data and reviewedall of the projects with the USCENTAFcivil engineering representative. We then

MSgt Terry Smith, 201st RHF, instructs SrA Amanda Rosato, 200th RHS, on the properconstruction stake-out of a horizontal curve.

200th/201st RHS personnel place a precast section of the vehicle search pit.


erecting a 15-foot-high berm surrounding the base camp,pouring more than 650 cubic yards of concrete, moving10,000 cubic yards of dirt, erecting more than 50,000 poundsof steel and laying more than 780 tons of asphalt.

In the course of their work, engineers battled some ofthe toughest weather and working conditions this smallPersian Gulf nation could dish out. Heat was the commontheme throughout the deployment. Doors had to remainclosed or temperatures would rise high enough to trigger firesuppression sprinklers. Pools had to be chilled beforeentering. Since temperatures rose well past 100 degreesduring the day, engineers started their workday before 4a.m., used personal water cooling systems and kept an eyeon each other.

Digging through the Qatari terrain posed anotherchallenge. The equipment operators likened it to diggingthrough the surface of the moon. Other challenges includedhaving to juggle construction projects, meshing an ever-rotating work force and adapting to strict host nationsecurity requirements. It would be easy to say this alchemywould never jell. Yet the results spoke for themselves — allassigned tasks were completed.

Great Work, Great RelationsRED HORSE units assisted with construction at Camp

Snoopy thanks to the United States’ and Qatar’s promisingand expanding relationship.

“This has been an ideal deployment for a number ofreasons,” said Col Richard L. Brazeau, commander, 200th RHS.“The construction projects at Camp Snoopy gave us a chanceto test our mettle at what we do best — building a base fromthe ground (or in this case, the rock) up. Culturally, we havehad the somewhat rare opportunity, at least for military people,to experience Qatari culture,” said Brazeau. “We have enjoyedit and look forward to returning in the future.”

1st Lt Eric Mannion is an environmental engineer with the201st RHF, Pennsylvania Air National Guard. Lt ColChristopher Cleaver, public affairs officer, Pennsylvania AirNational Guard and SSgt Anthony J. Unum, administrativesupport technician, 200th RED HORSE Squadron, Ohio AirNational Guard, contributed to this article.

turned our attention to local building practices and materialscommonly available in Qatar. Several key points arose. One,local structures are typically constructed from reinforcedconcrete or masonry products. Wood frame construction isalmost non-existent.

Second, if you ask a local vendor if they have a certainbuilding material available, 95 percent of the time they will tellyou it is in stock. The vendor will then go to whoever carriesthe item locally, purchase it, and resell it to you.

Finally, the local economy is quite unique since almost allbuilding materials are imported. Sizes, standards andspecifications vary widely due to multiple countries of origin.

With many of the initial questions answered and the sitesurvey data in hand, things started to look a bit better. Designof the facilities proceeded as well as could be expectedconsidering Air National Guard members had only two days amonth to accomplish all of the required work.

As is always the case, key traditional guardsmenvolunteered extra time to help accomplish the task. Profes-sional engineers and master tradesman alike offered theirtalents to produce an efficient design and make Camp Snoopya better place to live.

Making It HappenBefore we knew it, the first

deployment dates were on top ofus and it was time for the AdvonTeam to depart. Aside from a fewglitches related to reductions inthe load plan for the aircraft,things went very well.

Over the next 11 weeks the200th and 201st completed morethan 16 projects, including:

Qatar is a small peninsula midway down the Persian Gulf, borderedby Saudi Arabia to the west and a short hop from Bahrain. Roughlythe size of Connecticut, a half-million people call Qatar home. Qataris also home to large oil reserves and has the third largest supplyof liquid natural gas in the world.

SrA Matthew Bennett, 201st RHF, completes installation of one of the mostwelcome features in the Base Defense Operations Center facility — airconditioning.


by Letha Cozarteditor

Senior leaders from across Air Force civil engineeringgathered recently to inform and share concerns with oneanother on the status of CE activities and current and futurehappenings in the Air Force. The Civil Engineer WorldwideConference, held Nov. 27 through Dec. 1 at Tyndall Air ForceBase, Fla., was the forum for this annual information exchangeon issues that affect the way CE does business.

Maj Gen Earnest O. Robbins II, The Civil Engineer, adoptedthe new Air Force theme line, “No one comes close,” as thisyear’s Worldwide conference theme.

“‘No one comes close,’ is very appropriate today,” thegeneral said during his opening remarks to conferenceattendees. “No one else in the world comes close in terms of airsuperiority and air power. The United States is, will be, and canbe the very best in the world. On a smaller scale, our scale, ‘Noone comes close’ applies to what we do and the people werepresent. I don’t think any other functional area touches so

much of the Air Force, day in and day out, as we do. We knowour mission and we do it well.”

The five-day conference featured briefings on a wide rangeof Air Force civil engineering topics, including enlisted manning,retention and training issues; officer assignments; planning andprogramming; family housing and dormitories; militaryconstruction and environmental issues.

Lt Gen Michael E. Zettler, Deputy Chief of Staff forInstallations and Logistics, briefed several IL objectives,including Aerospace Expeditionary Force support, where hestressed the need to promote teamwork at forward bases. Thegeneral also highlighted “What’s to Come,” including improvingreadiness and operational effectiveness, taking care of people,capitalizing on evolving technology, recapitalizing aircraft andinfrastructure, and privatization.

Special presentations at the conference included TheDeveloping Aerospace Leaders Program, which was briefed byMaj Gen Charles D. Link, USAF (Ret), special assistant to the

continued on page 14

While Air Force leadership is getting the word out that “No one comes close,” CE’s leaders areworking to ensure their troops have the training and resources they need to maintain thatstandard at installations all over the world.

Air Force Civil Engineering’s senior leaders assembled at Tyndall Air Force Base, Fla., for the 2000 CE Worldwide conference.(Photo by Capt Aaron Benson)


by CMSgt Myrl KibbeHQ AFCESA, andMike GelsleichterApplied Research Associates, Inc.

In the military community as well as the business world,achieving balance is absolutely critical to accomplishing themission. Using the right mix and proportion of manpower,materials and equipment increases production and almost alwaysleads to a higher level of efficiency.

The CE community strives to maintainbalance throughout its organizational structurewhile meeting its work objectives and, ofcourse, while developing and sustaining aprofessional workforce. Balancing the size andstructure of the CE enlisted workforce is noexception and has become, in recent years, oneof our toughest challenges.

The Air Force ProcessResponsibility for managing enlisted

grades within a functional community ultimatelylies in the hands of the community’s leader-ship. To maintain process integrity, the AirForce traditionally conducts an enlisted gradereview every two years, known as the Air ForceEnlisted Grades Allocation Program. This isdesigned to ensure enlisted grades areequitably allocated to Headquarters U.S. AirForce, the major commands and field operatingagencies, while ensuring the number ofauthorized enlisted grades put on the manpowerbooks never exceeds the levels allowed by law.

Air Force Career Field Managers (AFCFM)are the focal point for this biennial program.AFCFMs have the responsibility and flexibilityto make changes to a career field’s enlistedstructure. They are responsible for reviewing,and in some cases modifying, grade profiles tomeet the specific needs of their respectivecommunities.

BackgroundThroughout the years, there has been

much speculation on how CE should structureits AFSs. During the 1980s, the enlisted gradestructures of most CE AFSs worked well. By theearly 1990s, however, force reductions andmission changes caused CE to streamline itsenlisted organizational structure by merging 17AFSs into 13. Throughout the remainder of the

A Balancing ActThe Air Force Enlisted Grades Allocation Program

Figure 1. Fire and P&E AFSs versus the AF model. The current Fire AFS ismore than 70% airmen, while the current P&E AFS is more than 64% airmen (ahealthy AFS requires 52%). When too many airmen compete for too few mid-level positions, the result is forced retraining of quality airmen.


1990s, newly developed AFSs such as Operations Managementand Readiness survived through a steady influx of voluntaryretrainees. AFSs such as Fire Protection and Pavements &Construction Equipment Operations (P&E) also prospered usingan enlisted structure built predominantly on junior enlistedauthorizations.

What was the common thread making all four of theseenlisted AFS structures work? Simply, a robust retention programcoupled with a not-so-healthy economy. Unfortunately, over thelast few years the picture has changed.

The ProblemThere are many factors that can, and often do, affect the

stability of an enlisted career field. Declines in retention andrecruitment, force retraining programs and gradeshortages are all daunting problems that havehad a significant impact on the health of much ofCE’s enlisted force.

On a grander scale, retention andrecruitment declines are borne and dealt with atan Air Force level. Force retraining and gradeshortages, however, are two problems that aremore easily mitigated, and in some casesresolved, by an individual functional community.

Structuring a Career FieldWith few exceptions, Air Force career fields

are designed to ensure a smooth flow ofpersonnel from the grade of airman basic to chiefmaster sergeant. The number of individualsphysically assigned to those AFSs can beinfluenced by factors such as: the totalauthorized for that AFS, retention andrecruitment rates, High Year Tenure (HYT)requirements, and annual promotionpercentages.

When a career field is designed using aproportionate mix of all enlisted grades,enlistment, retention and promotion rates allcombine to produce a “healthy or model” AFS.Alternatively, when a career field is designedcontrary to Air Force recommendations (i.e., adisproportionate number of gradeauthorizations or omitted enlisted grades),extraordinary measures are needed to sustain itshealth. These measures may include an “overreliance” on voluntary retrainees to sustain AFSgrowth, or a series of mandated retraining-outactions to reduce grade overages.

Sustaining a “non-AF model” AFS isrelatively easy when manpower is plentiful.Maintaining that same AFS structure in the faceof poor manning and low retention is far moredifficult, and can hamper an AFS’s ability to meetmission objectives and adversely affect themorale of its assigned troops. Currently, four CE

AFSs — Operations Management, Readiness, Fire Protection,and P&E — fall squarely within this category.

The FixToday’s retention and manpower shortfalls, resulting

primarily from a booming economy, have caused the CEcommunity to make unprecedented changes to the design andcomposition of some of its AFSs.

Within the last year, the Operations Management andReadiness career fields’ survivability was at stake; lowrecruitment had severely restricted the flow of retrainees into theAFSs. We restructured these AFSs to accept non-prior service,junior enlisted grades versus relying solely on 5-level retrainees.

The Fire Protection and P&E career fields annually faced

Figure 2. Readiness and Operations AFSs versus the AF model. With fewairmen authorizations in the previous structure, retraining-in was the onlygrowth source. The 2000 fix aligned this AFS to grow from the bottom up


CE Worldwidecontinued from page 11

Chief of Staff of the Air Force for National Defense Review. Thegeneral said the DAL program is about ensuring the Air Forcehas the right types of training and experiences in place todevelop future leaders. General Link emphasized the need forleaders to continue the transformation to a fully integrated airand space force.

Maj Gen John L. Barry, Director of Strategic Planning, Officeof the Deputy Chief of Staff for Plans and Programs, continuedthe transformation theme with a discussion of strategic planningfor the 21st century and details on the results of Vision Force —the vision that the Air Force is moving toward. He emphasizedthat this has been a busy year for airmen, with the release ofJoint Vision 2020, The Air Force Vision, The Aerospace Forceand The Air Force Strategic Plan, and preparations for theQuadrennial Defense Review.

Ms. Donna Rosa, project manager for Dyncorp, briefed theNext Generation Installation project sponsored by the AssistantSecretary of the Air Force for Installations. Ms. Rosa statedthat the NGI will produce a forward-looking decision analysisand enabling tool that will assist Air Force planners byintegrating pertinent information on existing infrastructureinvestment for installations, ranges and airspace. The study willproduce a hard copy “Installations Fact Book” that consolidatesmajor planning factors. The project will also result in an NGI website that can function as a repository of information for all AirForce decision-makers during the installation planning process.

Brig Gen L. Dean Fox, The Civil Engineer, Air MobilityCommand, and Brig Gen David M. Cannan, The Civil Engineer,Air Force Materiel Command, briefed attendees on lessons

learned from the MacDill and Kirtland Air Force Base CEconversions.

AMC began converting MacDill’s 6th Civil EngineerSquadron to a contractor operation in November 1999. GeneralFox’s discussion of lessons learned from MacDill included thefollowing: “programmed savings” should not be assumed;projections for long-term “savings” were overly optimistic; alack of flexibility exists in adjusting to changing priorities withoutincreasing contract costs; and base maintenance contracts are a“must-fund” at the expense of CE operations.

Kirtland’s A-76 study began in Dec. 1998, with the contractawarded in July 2000. General Cannon noted the followinglessons learned: operating cost should be established prior tothe start of the A-76 study; command standards must beunderstood by the base; finalization of the performance workstatement shouldn’t be allowed during negotiations; howsavings will be computed should be clearly communicated; afloor for an acceptable bid offer should be established; directconversion is not as streamlined and quick as it seems; anddirect conversions do not achieve comparable savings to thecompetitive process.

Contingency training, in particular the Silver Flag ExerciseSite curriculum, was briefed by Col Bruce R. Barthold,commander, Air Force Civil Engineer Support Agency. ColonelBarthold said that in the future Silver Flag training will haveincreased emphasis on command and control and beddowntasks and decreased emphasis on BRAAT (Base Recovery AfterAttack). AFCESA was host to this year’s conference.

force-retraining actions. We restructured these AFSs to increasethe number of mid and senior enlisted positions whilesimultaneously reducing the number of junior grade requirements.

Paradigm ChangesAlbeit painful, the successful restructuring of these AFSs will

require a significant change in paradigms. AFSs that wereexclusively staff sergeant and above are now structured using allenlisted grades. AFSs that were disproportionately junior enlistedwill now contain more mid and senior enlisted grades.

Technical and master sergeants assigned to those AFSs withnew junior enlisted grades (Operations Management andReadiness) will likely be assigned tasks once performed by masterand senior master sergeants, respectively. Over the years,personnel filling these technical and master sergeantauthorizations will actually be more skilled than theirpredecessors, simply because they were trained in that AFS fromthe beginning of their careers and not brought into the AFS as aresult of a retraining action.

Technical and master sergeants in those AFSs experiencingjunior grade reductions and mid/senior grade increases (P&E andFire Protection) may now be required to perform tasks oncerequired by staff and technical sergeants. Although levels of

responsibility may drop for those individuals assigned to theseAFSs, promotion opportunities should increase slightly whileforced retraining actions diminish, and qualified and experiencedpersonnel should not be forced to retrain to another career field.

So What’s Next?As with any change of this magnitude, patience and

perseverance are critical. Although the overall structure andcomposition of some CE AFSs has changed, physically recruitingand filling these newly developed enlisted positions will take time.When these changes are fully implemented and long-standingparadigms toward grade requirements and leadership roles arealtered, then positive outcomes will surely result. Over the nextfew years, we should see a “healthy or model” grade profiledevelop for all CE AFSs.

CMSgt Myrl Kibbe is the Air Force civil engineer career fieldmanager, Headquarters Air Force Civil Engineer SupportAgency, Tyndall AFB, Fla. Mike Gelsleichter is the former AirForce civil engineer career field manager. He now works forApplied Research Associates, Inc., Tyndall AFB, Fla.


by TSgt Steven E. Sandy366th TRS/Det 7 Public Affairs

Pavements and Equipment (P&E) personnel are peopleyou see every day on every Air Force base. They operate thedump trucks, backhoes, bulldozers, loaders, snow removalequipment and sweepers. They’re the ones who pour concreteto fix sidewalks and curbs. They’re the men and women whoreplace asphalt to keep the flight line operational and basestreets open. These members, who play a vital role in themission to keep aircraft taking off and landing safely, initiallylearn their skill at the training school at Fort Leonard Wood,Mo.

During the summer of 2000, RED HORSE and Prime BEEFteams deployed to Fort Leonard Wood to construct neededfacilities for the technical training course. The facilities theP&E course occupied barely provided enough space for thecadre and students during classroom portions of their trainingand were not conducive to a professional trainingenvironment. Training scenarios conducted outdoors werehampered by inclement weather conditions, adverselyaffecting hands-on training. To correct these deficiencies, theAir Force committed $1.5 million dollars for the construction ofnew facilities and outdoor inclement weather training sites onthis Army installation.

The 820th RED HORSE Squadron from Nellis AFB, Nev.,arrived in May 2000 and promptly began construction of a newfour-classroom facility, complete with break room and storagearea. The classroom project also included an electrical upgradefor future expansion. July 2000 brought the arrival of a 10-member AETC Prime BEEF team comprised of craftsmen fromAltus, Randolph, Scott, Keesler and Kelly Air Force bases.These team members constructed an enclosed observationtower, a sunshade pavilion, and a climate-controlled, ground-level observation facility. The team successfully completed allwork within a 40-day time constraint.

A ribbon cutting ceremony celebrated completion of thefacilities and set the example of “Excellence In All We Do.” MajGen William Welser III, AETC director of operations, presidedover the ceremony, accompanied by then Fort Leonard Woodcommanding general, Lt Gen Robert B. Flowers. Although this“first phase” of construction is complete, much more will bedone to bring this area up to the training standards desired by

Air Force personnel. Equipment parking areas, two K-Spanbuildings, personal vehicle parking and various other projectswill be constructed before the project is complete. Both the819th RHS and 823rd RHS are committed to deploy to FortLeonard Wood this year to construct the K-Spans. A majorityof the remaining workwill be finished as self-help projects by theP&E instructors asclass rotations permit.

This is a greatexample of thecommitment of AirForce civil engineerleadership to bringtogether the resourcesto make the improve-

ments a reality. The Air Force is known for having“outstanding” facilities and this is no exception. If you haven’tyet been to Fort Leonard Wood and seen the P&E trainingareas and facilities, Detachment 7 invites you to visit. The AirForce is making great progress in improving the trainingenvironment for future engineers!

Topnotch TrainingRED HORSE and Prime BEEF ImproveFacilities at Fort Leonard Wood

Fort Leonard Wood, Mo., is the home of Air Education and Training Command’s Pavement Maintenance &Construction Equipment Operator Apprentice Course. The Pavements and Equipment course introduces airmen to the CivilEngineer organization and allows them the chance to become a member of an elite group of Air Force personnel.

(Top) Construction of an observation tower for monitoringheavy equipment training. (Above) The new classroom facilityunder construction by the 820th RHS. (Photos by MSgt KenWillard)


Confined Space AwarenessConfined Space AwarenessConfined Space AwarenessConfined Space AwarenessConfined Space Awarenessby SMSgt Fred Spielmann202nd RHS

It was during a field exercise in 1989 that I received aphone call with a very disturbing message. A past employeeand long time friend had died in a confined space accident.With all his years of experience, how could this happen? Hewas doing a routine task. He’d done it hundreds of times —and so had I.

After working as a site development contractor in theCentral Florida area for 11 years, I finally decided to throw in thetowel. I had 35 employees, over a million dollars worth ofequipment with $40,000 a month in payments, a partner thatstarted fires I constantly had to extinguish, and the fear of losingeverything I had worked for whenever I left to attend annualtraining with my Guard unit. Over that 11-year period I workedfive and six 12 to 14-hour days a week and had taken my familyon three, four-day, weekend vacations. I’d had enough!

I found employment with a local utility contractor as anestimator and could finally work five days a week, 10 hours aday and have weekends to myself. I could even leave for twoweeks of annual training and not worry about going broke.Some of my long-time employees came with me, including theman who later perished in the accident.

We had just completed construction of a 12-foot diameter,30-foot deep, master sanitary pump station. No collector lineshad been installed, and two men were sent to complete a fewpunch list items. While the laborer was inside the structure on aladder installing a small flapper valve on the valve vault drainline, the foreman was touching up the exterior piping with paint.The foreman heard a noise in the wet well and immediatelyinvestigated. When he approached the hatch he saw the laborerlying in the bottom of the structure in three feet of water. Heimmediately called in the emergency on the two-way radio andproceeded down the ladder.

A mechanic working on a machine nearby rushed to thesite. When he arrived he found both men lying in the bottom ofthe structure. By this time an emergency response team was enroute, so the mechanic started down the ladder to attempt torescue the two men. As he approached the bottom of the well,he began to feel dizzy. He believed the foreman was still alive,but feared for his own life. Ascending back up the ladder, he

could hear the emergency response team arriving.The mechanic explained the situation, to the best of his

knowledge, to the response team, but they were unfamiliar withthe lift station and refused to enter until their supervisor waspresent to assess the situation. If either man was alive when theteam arrived, they were dead by the time the rescue wasattempted. The initial cause of death was listed as drowning.

An investigation ensued, but no other reason for theirdeath was disclosed. OSHA also investigated the accident andcited the company for not complying with confined space entryprocedures. But how could two healthy men performing aroutine task end up dead?

It wasn’t until I began my confined space entry and rescuetraining that I understood what killed these men. They died forthe same reason there are corpses on Mt. Everest. Lack ofoxygen! It was not what was in the wet well that killed these menor made the rescuer dizzy; it was the absence of oxygen. Theymay have drowned in three foot of water, but they passed outfirst. Proper ventilation, an air quality monitoring instrument, ora breathing apparatus — any of the three would haveprevented this tragedy.

Confined space procedures should be followed wheneverentering a confined space regardless of whether it is a newstructure or an existing structure. If it has a hatch, lid or only oneway in and out it is considered a confined space. The equipmentand training required is expensive, but necessary. If, at present,you can’t afford the equipment and training, at least indoctrinateyour people on confined space awareness. Ensure that yourpeople understand what is considered a confined space andensure that an emergency response team trained in confinedspace rescue is on standby any time a confined space isentered.

Weigh the risk factor. You may have to live with theoutcome.

SMSgt Fred Spielmann is the pavements/constructionequipment superintendent for the 202nd RED HORSESquadron, Florida Air National Guard.

Editor’s Note: The Air Force Civil Engineer Support Agencyfielded the first two CDs in a four-part series of trainingproducts this summer to provide standardized familiarizationand training programs for confined space entry and rescue.For more information, contact CMSgt Carl Glover at DSN 523-6112 or commercial (850) 283-6112, or send e-mail [email protected].

Commentary on Issues Affecting Air Force Civil Engineering

Viewsfrom theField


by TSgt Michael A. WardAFCESA Public Affairs

It’s been said California has four seasons — flood,drought, earthquake and fire. You’ll get no argument on thelast one as California experienced one of its worst wildfireseasons last year. Thousands of firefighters from across thenation responded to numerous fires throughout the state.

One of the most unusual fires occurred near VandenbergAir Force Base in mid-September. More than 1,000 military andcivilian firefighters were called out to fight the Harris Fire,named for the nearby Harris Grade Road. That fire, swept byhigh winds, consumed about 9,700 acres before firefighterscould contain it three days later … or so they thought.

As the fire burned its way across the area’s hills andvalleys those three days, it made its way down to the BarkaSlough wetlands, an area thick with naturally occurring peat.Peat is one of nature’s fuels. It’s made up of decayingvegetation that has begun to carbonize. Left alone for a fewthousand years it can become coal.

As firefighters contained the last remnants of the HarrisFire, they soon discovered that the pesky little fire down in thewetlands wasn’t going out.

“We had a small contingent assigned to the bog because

Bogged DownPeat Bog Fire Tests the Patience of Vandenberg Firefighters

we weren’t sure exactly what was burning and where it wasgoing,” said Mark Farias, Vandenberg fire chief. “They wereputting a lot of hard work and blood, sweat and tears intoputting out the bog while the rest of us were fighting a fire 10times as big. Our fire was going out quicker than theirs and werealized then we had something special on our hands.”

What they had was a fire that had gone underground, ableto feed off a huge peat reservoir built up over thousands ofyears. What they didn’t have was a way to put it out. Theysoon discovered traditional firefighting methods wereineffective not only because the fire was below the surface,but because of the surface. The slough is covered in layers ofwatertight clay, three to five feet deep. To make matters worse,heat from the fires baked the clay and turned it into a hardenedcap over much of the area.

“The fire became kind of like a nasty ingrown toenail. Itwent from being a mild irritant, to being very, very annoying,”Farias said.

Fire crews tried saturating the ground, hoping some of thewater would reach the fire through fissures in the clay. They

Spectators watch from behind a schoolyard fence as a majorwildfire on Vandenberg AFB, Calif., burns in the distance.(Photo by TSgt Scott Wagers)

The CE WInter 00-0118

brought in water cannons that couldshoot 2,000 gallons a minute and hired acontractor to lay industrial sprinklerpipes with 150-gallon per minutesprinkler heads. Their efforts helpedreduce the amount of smoke comingfrom the bog, but did little to extinguishthe fire.

“You need three things for a fire toexist — fuel, heat and oxygen — andthis one’s got all three,” Farias said. “Weneed to remove something and with therainy season coming we hope to reducethe heat and oxygen level underneaththe soil enough to put the fire out.Mother Nature can usually do thingsthat we can’t.”

Actually Mother Nature is part ofthe problem. The Barka Slough is hometo some environmentally protectedspecies, and base and governmentofficials are concerned about anysolution that may further damage theenvironment.

“We want to do the right thingenvironmentally,” Farias said. “We couldhave put the thing out the very first day

Concern shows on the faces of base and community emergency responders as they discuss ways to contain the fire. (Photo bySSgt Janice H. Cannon)

An exhausted firefighter takes a break. (Photo by SSgt Janice H. Cannon)

The CE WInter 00-01 19

The underground fire at the Barka Slough has burnedabout 85 acres of the more than 600-acre wetland area. Likecoal, peat produces a dirty, irritating smoke. That has raisedenvironmental concerns for emergency responders, as wellas the base and community. While air quality has beenaffected by the smoke, Vandenberg bioenvironmentalofficials announced Jan. 10 that personal air sample testsconducted throughout October on people working in the areaof the slough record no signs of harmful levels of contami-nants.

In addition to the firefighters, members of Vandenberg’s30th Civil Engineer Squadron Operations Flight are involvedwith containing the Barka Slough Fire and members of thesquadron’s Environmental Management Flight are monitor-ing the environmental integrity of the area.

if we had bulldozed it and drowned it.But I think we’d still be paying for thatlong afterwards.” However, he concedesthat if the fire is still burning after therainy season base officials may have nochoice but to use “more intrusivemeasures” which could include rippingopen the cap with a bulldozer or drilling

holes in it and flooding the fire. Baseofficials have already contacted theDepartment of Energy about conductingaerial mapping using deep-thermalimaging equipment to find hot spots.

In the meantime, smoke emanatingfrom the slough is a constant reminder tobase firefighters that there’s still work to

be done; onlyit may require

some patience.“We wanted to put this thing to

bed, make it part of history and chalk itup as a success story,” Farias said. “Thefrustration here is that it’s 2001 andwe’re still messing around with thisthing. We’re a lot closer to reaching thefinish line with it, but it has cost no smallamount of money, resources and timeand effort.”

Firefighting efforts included using bulldozers to create firebreaks. (Photo by SSgt Janice H. Cannon)

A walk with the dog turns into a sightseeing opportunity as the fire makes its way across the hills and valleys that make up theVandenberg area. (Photo by SSgt Janice H. Cannon)


by MSgt Bob HaskellNational Guard Bureau Public Affairs

A tall, spindly Macedonian ladnamed Ristof is a Los Angeles Lakersbasketball fan. His white jersey with thedistinctive yellow and purple logomakes that very clear. A stocky MarineCorps Reserve major named JohnChurch is a life-long Detroit Tigersbaseball fan — as in fanatic. If youdon’t believe it, ask him.

Thanks to Church and a host ofother American military people, and thefamily that owns the Tigers, Ristof andhis friends began playing basketball ona new, smooth concrete court in theRepublic of Macedonia this summer.

The court, complete with new whitebackboards and orange hoops, is inNegotino, a southern Macedoniacommunity. It takes up one half of anacre-size playground that Air NationalGuard civil engineers, Marine Reservecombat engineers, Navy Seabees andMacedonian soldiers and civiliancontractors built and equipped withabout $25,000 in privately donatedAmerican funds.

Church, the ranking Marine on thejoint military staff, obtained $20,000 ofthat from Michael and Marian Ilitch,owners of the Tigers. The Ilitch family,he knew, came from Macedonia. MikeIlitch is a former Marine.

“This was a shot in the dark. Ithas restored my faith in humanity,”Church told The Washington Post aftergetting an unexpectedly generousresponse to a letter asking for help thathe wrote to Mike Ilitch a few weeksearlier.

They took on the playgroundproject in a field choked with weeds

A Playground for Peace

TSgt Patrick O’Brien (left) and Marine Corps Reserve Sgt Christopher Labonne flank aMacedonian boy named Ristof on the playground they helped build for children inNegotino, a small town in southern Macedonia.

Vermont Air National Guard TSgt Patrick O’Brien (left) helps a Macedonian manassemble a swing set on the playground that civil engineers from Vermont’s 158thFighter Wing helped build for children in Negotino. (Photos by MSgt Bob Haskell)


The Vermont Air National Guard led the Cornerstone2000-3 deployment, part of a five-year-old effort to stabilizethe Balkans, because of the Green Mountain State’s NationalGuard State Partnership relationship with Macedonia.

Specifically, the 158th Fighter Wing’s civil engineersquadron was the lead agency for a joint task force that spentMay and June renovating two clinics, a community center andtwo schools in the neighboring towns of Pepeliste andKrivolak on the banks of the Vardar River.

National Guard people have been directing New Horizonshumanitarian missions in Latin America for many years.Leading this Cornerstone operation in Europe was anotherstep in the Guard’s Total Force integration.

More than 200 Air National Guard civil engineers fromVermont, Indiana and Oregon, 100 Marine Reserve combatengineers from Baltimore, Md., and from Lynchburg andRoanoke, Va., and 50 active duty and reserve Navy Seabeesout of Rota, Spain, and Fort Belvoir, Va., participated in theeffort.

They were commanded by Idaho Air Guard Col ClaytonAnderson, an Army veteran of Vietnam who has been a civilengineer for 25 years. The American force, split into fourrotations, served for the two months with 100 or soMacedonian soldiers and civilian workers led by Col TrajceJakimoski.

“The number one mission is good will. Number two is thebuilding,” maintained Anderson. “If we didn’t want to buildgood relationships, we could have sent the money and hadthis work done. As engineers, we can leave behind abyproduct of our efforts. This is a way to take a positive stepfor peace.

“Besides,” he added, “these joint task forces are the wayour forces will deploy in the future. Members of our differentservices have to learn how to communicate with each otherand to understand that the Finns, the Bosnians, and theMacedonians do things differently from the way we work inthe United States. We have to be able to understand thedifferent customs and cultures of the places where we maygo.” (MSgt Bob Haskell, NGB/PA)

VVVVVermont Air National Guard and Macedonia: Permont Air National Guard and Macedonia: Permont Air National Guard and Macedonia: Permont Air National Guard and Macedonia: Permont Air National Guard and Macedonia: Partners in Partners in Partners in Partners in Partners in Peaceeaceeaceeaceeace

Vermont Air National Guard SSgt Clem Devlin, guided byMarine Corps Reservists, maneuvers a bucket-load of sandy fillover a 15,000-gallon fuel tank beside a medical clinic andcommunity center they helped rebuild in Krivolak, Republic ofMacedonia. (Photo by MSgt Bob Haskell)

and surrounded by a rundown chain-linkfence beside a Negotino apartmenthouse as a special gift to the people ofMacedonia, explained Vermont Air GuardMSgt Dwight Harrington.

“This is not a Cornerstone project,but we may build better relations withthis playground than with anything elsewe do over here. And that’s why we’rereally here,” said Idaho Air Guard ColClayton Anderson, who commanded the

American troops taking part in OperationCornerstone 2000-3.

Local contractors poured theconcrete court and walkways, hauled incrushed rock and erected a new fencearound the rejuvenated play area. TheVermont Guard people purchased a newslide, a swing set, six park benches andspring-mounted rides for the town’schildren to play on.

It wasn’t long before Ristof and his

friends could begin showing their stuffon the new basketball court.

“This is better. It is very good,”praised Ristof in respectable English.“More kids, more friends, will come hereto play basketball. We are very happy.”


Call in the Reserves!… not just forwar, but also for renovations.

That’s just what two Air ForceOffice of SpecialInvestigations unitsdid to improve theirworking areas at afraction of theconventional cost.

“It’s really a ‘win-win’ situation,” saidCol David Bearden,OSI’s director ofreserve affairs. “TheOSI gets a couple offacilities that weotherwise couldn’t

have afforded, and the Guardsmen andReservists fulfill their annual trainingrequirements in their wartime skills.”

The two OSI units on the receivingend of the renovations are Det. 401 atRandolph Air Force Base, Texas, and the33rd Field Investigative Squadron atAndrews AFB, Md.

Together, funding the projectsthrough the normal budget processwould have cost between $600,000 and$700,000, Bearden said. Instead, the costto OSI will total a mere $75,000.

Why the savings? It comes down tothe cost of labor.

“The vast majority of cost for atypical construction project is the costof labor,” said Maj Larry Merkl, managerof the two projects. “But if you useGuard or Reserve labor, then the labor isessentially free, and you only have topay for materials.”

Merkl is a member of the MarylandAir National Guard’s 235th Civil EngineerSquadron, which is overseeing the workat Andrews with support from locallybased 459th CES Reservists. The work atRandolph is being completed by the433rd CES out of Kelly AFB, Texas.

At Det. 401, the work entailsconsolidating OSI work environmentsfrom three separate locations to one.Doing so requires a significant overhaulof the building into which all detachmentmembers will eventually move. The work

Construction crews with the 5thCivil Engineer Squadron, Minot AirForce Base, N.D., are improving Minot’sstreets while saving the base thousandsof dollars courtesy of a new paving

includes demolition of old walls,construction of new ones, upgrading theelectrical and telephone systems,upgrading the computer networkinfrastructure, laying new carpet,building new polygraph suites andobservation rooms, upgrading theevidence facility, and wiring the confer-ence room for audio and video briefings.

The 33rd FIS found itself needingmore space due to a sizable squadronpersonnel plus-up, from 37 members to89. To help with the overflow, the civilengineers are renovating an old ware-house.

To make the building suitable, it willget a new roof, paint, ceiling tiles andcarpet, plus new walls to accommodatethree polygraphs suites, an observationbooth, two offices and a storage room.Another much-needed addition will be anew heating, ventilation and air condi-tioning system, complete with all newductwork.

Renovations are expected to becomplete by the end of January. Whenboth projects are done, Merkl expectsjob satisfaction to swell in the hearts ofthose who’ve done the work.

“We get our training,” Merkl said,“but at the same time we get to givesomething back to the Air Force. Itmakes the troops happy.” (Maj MikeRichmond, AFOSI Public Affairs)

Guard, Reserve Build Up OSI

machine purchased through an Air Forcerapid “loan” program.

The self-propelled paver allowsMinot’s engineers to make immediaterepairs to base streets without having to

wait for funds to hire contractors forthese smaller jobs, said CMSgt KevinMortenson, 5th CES horizontal construc-tion shop superintendent.

“In the past, it could take several

‘Loan’ Paves Way for Base Engineers

SrA Andre S. Murray (left) and MSgtGeorge W. Anderson (right), both fromthe 459th CES Electrical/Power Pro Shop,Andrews AFB, perform buildingrenovations for another Andrews tenant,Headquarters Air Force Office of SpecialInvestigations. (Photo courtesy 459thCES)


months to process a work order, obtainthe necessary funding and hire acontractor before we could make eventhe simplest road repairs on base,” thechief said. “With the road paver, we cango out and make the repairs in a coupleof days depending on the complexity ofthe job.”

The repair shop turned to the AirForce’s Fast Payback Capital InvestmentProgram for the $111,500 needed to buythe machine. In return, the shop repaysthe “loan” through savings it earns frommaking the repairs.

According to the chief, the squad-ron expects to save the base thousandsof dollars each year since it only needs

to pay for the asphalt it uses for eachroad repair.

Since they started using themachines in September, engineers haveused more than 4,000 tons of asphalt topave new access roads to the base’ssewage lagoon roads and lift stations.They also reconstructed a parking lot.

The base has lacked this type ofequipment for years, and it is a welcomeaddition to the squadron’s constructionfleet, said Loren Christianson, 5th CEShorizontal construction shop.

“[Using the equipment] is greatexperience we can’t get at many AirForce bases,” added co-worker A1CNathan Routhier. (TSgt Brian Orban,

5th Bomb Wing Public Affairs)

Editor’s Note: More information on theFast Payback Capital Investment(FASCAP) Program and the Productiv-ity Investment Fund (PIF) program isavailable in chapters 3 and 4, respec-tively, of Air Force Instruction 38-301,which can be viewed on the Air ForcePublishing web site: http://afpubs.hq.af.mil/pubfiles/af/38/afi38-301/afi38-301.pdf

In the never-ceasing effort tomodernize infrastructure on the military’saging bases, civil engineers at HollomanAir Force Base, N.M., are meeting thechallenge head-on.

The 49th Civil Engineer Squadron’sexterior electric shop is modernizing baseinfrastructure, and saving money, byreplacing outdated utility pole crossarms.

“The old T-arms are not as stable asthe technology we have today,” saidPhillip Trujillo, shop chief. “We arecurrently replacing them with a polymer-type conducer that is more stable andmore efficient.”

This type of project requires shopmembers to don climbing spikes andclimb each pole in the line that is beingreplaced. The shop has already replacedcross arms on nearly six miles of poles.

“These guys are working very hard.I’m really impressed at the speed they’reaccomplishing this task,” said Trujillo.According to the shop chief, the projectcould have been contracted, but theydecided to tackle it themselves, savingthe Air Force more than $40,000.

“Probably the best part about thewhole thing is the money we’re savingthe Air Force,” he explained. “Butanother great benefit is the training theguys are getting out of this. When wehave an emergency situation and wecan’t use the bucket trucks, the onlyway to fix the poles is to climb them. If

Members of the 49th Civil Engineer Squadron’s ExteriorElectric Shop replace outdated utility-pole cross arms atHolloman Air Force Base, N.M. (Photo by A1C Chris Uhles)

Electric Shop Modernizes, Saves Money

they don’t have the trainingbefore we get into that sortof a situation, it’s the wrongtime to learn.”

“This is a good chancefor us to fine tune ourclimbing abilities and learnhow to work in this type ofsituation,” said A1C ShawnBisbing.

In the last few years,the shop has saved the AirForce “thousands ofdollars,” by completingtasks often contracted outat other bases.

“A lot of the utilitypoles and the transformerson base are real old,” saidTrujillo. “Next year we’ll behitting the housing areasand completing this sameprocess.” (A1C ChrisUhles, 49th Fighter WingPublic Affairs)


The 107th Civil Engineer Squadron,Niagara Falls, N.Y., joined Army NationalGuard engineers and Naval MilitiaSeaBees in helping the city of Buffalodig out from the third worst one-daysnowfall in city history.

On Monday, November 20, justdays before the Thanksgiving holiday,Buffalo was inundated by a rare early-season storm. In a 24-hour period, morethan 25 inches of snow fell, paralyzingthe city and much of western New YorkState.

By Tuesday morning the storm’sdamage was visible throughout westernNew York. Local and national mediashowed viewers across the countryimages of abandoned vehicles indowntown Buffalo. Schoolchildren whocould not reach their homes took shelterin local businesses or communitycenters. Reopening the city of Buffalowould require all the assets the statecould muster. Fortunately, the New YorkNational Guard had both the assets andthe experience in emergency response.

Soldiers, airmen and sailors de-ployed a variety of heavy engineerassets to assist Department of Transpor-tation snow removal efforts. In just 48hours of continuous operations, theNational Guard helped the city reopen intime for the Thanksgiving holiday.

“Our emergency response force inBuffalo was truly a joint team. The AirGuard’s 107th Civil Engineers haveextensive experience working with usduring snow emergencies and adapt tothe Army’s staff and operations quickly,”said Army National Guard Col JeffreyYeaw. “We really could not accomplishthe mission without the Air Guard orNaval Militia airmen and sailors whowork side by side with our ArmyEngineers. In state emergencies, we’re allone team.” (Maj Richard Goldenberg,NY ARNG)

(Above, below) Soldiers, airmen and sailors from the New York National Guarddeployed a variety of heavy engineer assets to assist Department of Transportationcrews in snow removal efforts in the city of Buffalo. In just 48 hours of continuousoperations, the National Guard helped the city reopen in time for the Thanksgivingholiday. (Photo by Maj Richard Goldenberg)

Joint Team Digs Buffalo Out

The Air Force ContractAugmentation Program (AFCAP) willreplace 35 Aerospace ExpeditionaryForce (AEF) power production positionsat four bases in the Kingdom of Saudi

AFCAP Recruits Power Pros

Arabia, Kuwait and the United ArabEmirates for one year. This new initiativewas designed to directly reduce thepower production career field operationstempo. The AFCAP task order fills AEF

rotational taskers from Dec. 3, 2000 toDec. 2, 2001. This support will reduce theAEF power production 90-day rotationaltaskings requirement by 140 militarypersonnel.


The 99th Civil Engineer Squadronexplosive ordnance disposal team atNellis Air Force Base, Nev., recentlylived up to their motto of “Anytime,Anywhere!”

On October 2 at 11:15 p.m. theNellis Command Post notified the EODstandby team, SSgt Jessie White andSrA Leo Livas, that an A-10 hadjettisoned two live MK84 2,000-pound bombs north of the basedue to an in-flight emergency.

At 7:30 the next morning, TSgtJames Walter and Airman Livaswere transported by helicopter tothe impact site — a rugged hillsideat 6,000-plus feet in elevation —by the 66th Rescue Squadron.

One MK84 bomb detonated onimpact and the other broke up onimpact. About a third of the high-explosive filler remained from the brokenbomb, and the base plate from the bombthat detonated was recovered. SergeantWalter and Airman Livas successfullydisposed of all explosive hazards.

The U.S. Air Force Academy firedepartment has been recommended foraccreditation by the Commission on FireAccreditation International (CFAI).

The accreditation process wasinitiated in October 1998. It involvedproviding answers and exhibits to 233competencies, ranging from riskassessment to staffing and equipment.CFAI inspection teams visited theAcademy to inspect those 233competencies in June and October. The

99th CES explosive ordnance disposalteam members responded when an A-10jettisoned two MK84 2,000-pound bombsonto a rugged hillside north of the basedue to an in-flight emergency. (Photoscourtesy 99th CES)

Academy Fire Department Recommended for Accreditation

commission will certify them as anaccredited fire agency in March 2001.

CFAI is an independent, non-profitentity created in 1996 to provide acomprehensive system of fire andemergency service evaluation to helpdetermine risks and fire safety needs,evaluate the performance of theorganization involved, and provide amethod for continuous improvement.

The CFAI process is similar tohospital and childcare center

Meeting the Challenge

The following day SSgt AmandaHomer and Airman Livas returned tothe site and verified the area to be freefrom all explosive hazards. Missioncomplete. Team Nellis again met thechallenge! (CMSgt Doug Clark, 99thCES)

accreditation, and fire service agenciesthroughout the world are consideringthis process to evaluate their programs.To date, only 36 agencies have beenaccredited worldwide. The USAFA firedepartment is the first in the Air Force tobe recommended for accreditation. TwoNavy fire departments, Naval Air StationJacksonville and Keflavik, have beenaccredited. (The Fire Fighter Gazette,Nov. 2000)

AFCAP is a cost-plus award feecontract designed to provide on-callcapability in the complete range ofcontingency civil engineer and servicessupport, except crash/fire rescue,explosive ordnance disposal, mortuaryaffairs and field exchanges. The currentAFCAP contractor is ReadinessManagement Support (RMS) L.C., asubsidiary of Johnson Controls.

The program has seen considerableactivity during the past year, with taskorders in temporary construction,renovation and disaster response. TheAFCAP contractor completedrenovations to an existing open bay firestation in Aruba, corrected airfield safetydeficiencies in Ecuador, and is currentlyinstalling four temporary facilities and aBAK-12 aircraft arresting barrier and

providing base operations support atHato International Airport, Curaçao.

AFCAP was also used to procureand deliver emergency disaster reliefsupplies for the U.S. State Department’sOffice of Foreign Disaster Assistance,including emergency supplies duringrecent flooding in India.

The CE Winter 00-0126

‘The Challenge of Change’Civil engineer financial managers meet in Colorado Springs

by Maj Martin GranumHQ USAF

“On behalf of The Air Force Civil Engineer, Maj Gen EarnestO. Robbins II, I welcome you.” That was the greeting Ms. Rita J.Maldonado used to welcome more than 200 attendees fromacross the Air Force to the 2000 Air Force Civil Engineer FinancialManagers’ Conference, held August 22-25 in Colorado Springs,Colo.

Ms. Maldonado, Chief, Operation and MaintenanceDivision, Office of the Civil Engineer, was the conference host.“This dynamic and informative conference is the premier learningand networking opportunity for all of us in the civil engineerfinancial management community,” Ms. Maldonado said.

The conference focused on the needs of installationfinancial managers, with briefings and classes designed toprepare them to meet “The Challenge of Change,” the theme ofthe conference.

Twenty separate topics were addressed in the three and ahalf day conference, beginning with a videotape address from LtGen Michael E. Zettler, Deputy Chief of Staff for Installations &Logistics, who began by commending those present on a jobwell done. “Collectively you handle over 5 billion dollarsannually, and you do so with the utmost integrity and profes-sionalism. The Air Force and the American people have placed inyour care a staggering level of resources, and you have re-sponded with an unblemished record of accountability and soliddecision making.”

General Zettler also spoke to future levels of Real PropertyMaintenance (RPM) funding. “As you know our Real PropertyMaintenance accounts have been stretched to the breaking pointfor several years now. I wish I could tell you that a fix was athand, but the reality is we’re facing still more lean years as theAir Force corporately addresses many vital concerns, such aspeople, modernization, recruiting and retention, to name just afew.” His outlook was that improvement in RPM funding wouldultimately come in incremental increases as the Air Forcegradually returns to an adequate level of infrastructure invest-ment.

The challenge of change theme prevailed throughout theconference, with briefings on many of the changes in thefinancial management business, but none generated moreinterest than the presentations on the new Facility SustainmentModel (FSM).

According to Maj Lowell A. Nelson, the Air Staff program

analyst working on FSMimplementation, “Theconference was theperfect opportunity tointroduce the FacilitySustainment Model,DoD’s new real propertymaintenance requirementsmodel, to funds managersAir Force-wide. Theimplementation of FSMin programming,budgeting and executionprocesses will be greatlyimproved by thequestions and insightsthe conference attendeesbrought out.”

The conferenceafforded a rare opportu-nity for financialmanagers to gather. According to Ms. Cherry L. Wilcoxon-Hurt,AFIT Course Director for Resources and Financial Management,“most base-level civil engineer financial management personnelare not afforded an opportunity to interact or network with AirStaff, major command, and other support agencies or attend CEfinancial management-specific training. The conference success-fully accomplished those feats and many more. It was a greatvenue for the exchange of information and ideas.”

MSgt Kristy Wegrzyniak, 819th RED HORSE SquadronResource Advisor, echoed those thoughts, “I appreciated beingable to put a face with the many people I have talked with andworked with over the phone, but had never met. The conferencehelped me to look at my job from a broader perspective. Thecross feed of information and the sharing of problems and waysto solve them was definitely beneficial.”

The conference wrapped up with the Resource AdvisorPanel, a forum that enabled the major command resourceadvisors to field questions directly from conference attendees. Aconference favorite, this year’s RA Panel was perhaps the bestever, with participation from every major command.

The conference closed with Ms. Maldonado thankingeveryone for their participation, and thanking Col Carl Tickel, theSpace Command Civil Engineer, for serving as the host majorcommand. “Your Space Command staff provided us world-classsupport,” Ms. Maldonado said, “and as a result this conferencehas been a huge success.”

Maj Martin Granum, Program Management Branch, Operationand Maintenance Division, Office of the Civil Engineer, HQUSAF.

(Top) Ms. Rita J. Maldonado addresses conference attendees.(Center) Displays from each major command, field operatingagency and direct reporting unit showcased their people,installations and mission. (Bottom) Brig Gen Wilma Vaught,USAF (ret), (second from left) was the conference dinnerkeynote speaker. (Photos courtesy AF/ILEO)


A Moody Air Force Base, Ga.,firefighter is a recipient of the 2000 CMSgtFred Archer Military Award givenannually to outstanding senior enlistedmembers by Tuskegee Airmen Inc.

With more than 100 submissions AirForce-wide, MSgt Steven C. Adams, 347thCivil Engineer Squadron Fire ProtectionFlight, was chosen as one of four winnersof the military awards.

Adams was cited for providing fireprotection for 92 combat aircraft and for319 facilities worth $238 million. Hesupervises 22 military and six civilianfirefighters. He also manages a $3 millionfirefighting vehicle flight.

Adams has responded to 43 in-flightand ground emergencies involving unsafe

landing gear, afterburner blowouts, barrierengagements, hot brakes and main powerfailures, and hasn’t lost any aircraft tofire.

Adams thanked CMSgt RodneyColeman, 347th CES Fire Protection Flightchief, for noticing the things he did.“Without him, I wouldn’t have won. ChiefColeman always takes the time to writedown everyone’s accomplishments onpaper, as well as praise them.”

Tuskegee Airmen Inc. was foundedin 1972 and exists mainly to motivateyoung Americans to achieve excellence ineducation; nondiscrimina-tory practicesin all aspects of life; and an increasedpursuit of careers in aviation. The awardsare open to all Air Force people in every

Firefighter Wins Tuskegee Award

MSgt Steven Adams, 347th CES, is a recipient ofthe 2000 Chief Master Sergeant Fred Archer MilitaryAward given to outstanding senior enlistedmembers by the Tuskegee Airman Inc. (Photo byTSgt Cecil Daw)

Brig Gen Lawrence F. Enyart retiredJan. 12 as the mobilization assistant toThe Civil Engineer, Headquarters U.S. AirForce, Pentagon. Col Donald L. Ritenour,formerly the special assistant to thecommander of Air Education and TrainingCommand, succeeds General Enyart.

Col Cornelius J. (Connie) Carmody,formerly The Civil Engineer, HeadquartersAir Combat Command, Langley Air ForceBase, Va., succeeds Col J. Carlton Tickelas The Civil Engineer, Headquarters AirForce Space Command, Peterson AirForce Base, Colo. Colonel Tickel has been

assigned as special assistant to the vicecommander, HQ AFSPC.

Col Patrick A. Burns, formerly TheCivil Engineer, Headquarters Pacific AirForces, Hickam AFB, Hawaii, succeedsColonel Carmody as The Civil Engineer,HQ ACC.

Colonel David W. DeFoliart, formerPrograms Division chief, Office of theCivil Engineer, Headquarters U.S. AirForce, Pentagon, succeeds Colonel Burnsas The Civil Engineer, HQ PACAF.

Col Jon D. Verlinde, deputy directorof civil engineering for Air Mobility

Key Personnel Changes

Command, Scott AFB, Ill., has beenassigned as The Civil Engineer, Head-quarters Air Force Reserve Command,Robins AFB, Ga. Colonel Verlindereplaces Col John W. Mogge Jr., whoretires March 31.

James R. Einwaechter, P.E., has joinedthe Headquarters Air Force Civil EngineerSupport Agency staff at Tyndall AFB,Fla., as executive director. He is formerly aprogram manager in the EngineeringDivision, Office of the Civil Engineer,Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Pentagon.

Air Force firefighters were part ofapproximately 1,000 firefighters whoqualified and participated in the ninthannual Firefighter World ChallengeCompetition, Nov. 1-4, in Las Vegas, Nev.Firefighters from Edwards and TravisAFBs, Calif.; Little Rock AFB, Ark.;Mildenhall Air Base, United Kingdom;

Firefighters in Worldwide Competition

and Ramstein AB, Germany, competed inthe international event.

During the finals, the Edwards andTravis teams were selected to performthe demonstration run for the relayevent. Travis won the head-to-headcompetition between the two teams. Ofthe four major events, the highest Air

Force finish was by Ramstein’s MSgtMichael Cavilerio in the Chiefs Compe-tition. The challenge, billed as the“toughest two minutes in sports,” wasbroadcast by ESPN on Dec. 10. (CMSgtCarl Glover, HQ AFCESA)

career field. (SSgt Nickol Houston, 347thWing Public Affairs)


Neil P. ArnoldPeter I. BakoLamberto M. BrazaWanda V. BroussardDavid W. BruceAndrew C. CarawayR. Craig ColeAnthony O. CopelandMichael A. CopleyAnne M. CoverstonEdgar M. CunananStephen P. DemianczykChristopher G. DuffySaroya I. FollenderJohn A. FreyTimothy L. FullerJay D. GlascockKent C. HalversonMark E. HanleyDaniel T. HoltTay W. JohannesGregory S. KeysorStephen R. KoenigMarie O. KokotajloKathryn L. KolbeSteven N. LacasseMary P. LanghillHenry F. Marcinowski IIIWilliam P. Mazzeno

Mark H. McCloudGregory L. McClureBobbie A. MooreGregory R. OttomanSteven L. PhillipsTasha L. Pravecek (BEE)Anthony R. RamageThomas A. RietkerkJuvenal Q. SalomonPaul F. SandMichael E. SaundersCraig J. SlebrchThomas J. SvobodaJeffery S. SzatanekForrest C. ThompsonRaymond TsuiJeffrey R. UllmannDavid S. VaughnMark A. ViviansEric L. WarnerScott A. WarnerJonathan D. WebbJoseph P. Wedding IIIMichael R. WehmeyerGreg A. WilliamsR. Brec WilshusenFrank V. WilsonMarjorie E. Wimmer

2000 Major-Selects

The following Air Force civil engineer officers have been selected for promotion to major. Congratulations to all on theirdedication and achievement.

Raymond F. Allen IIRichard G. AuldJohn S. BenderGary D. BushnellDonald L. CoteVincent E. DavisGlenn L. DeeseCalvin E. J. DickensAntonio J. FrancisSteven FullerGary A. GentzDennis J. Hackenberger

2000 Chief Master Sergeant-Selects

The following Air Force civil engineer NCOs have been selected for promotion to chief master sergeant. Congratulationsto all on their leadership and achievement.

Jeffrey L. HillRuss L. LichtenbergerRicardo V. MontoyaMichael J. O’DonnellDwayne E. PainterDouglas L. PapineauSusan A. PopeTimothy P. SteeleDarryl R. StewartSteven A. TaylorTroy C. Wiitala


The United States Air Forces inEurope Construction and TrainingSquadron opened its doors in Septemberto local politicians, unit members pastand present, and many other specialguests in celebration of 50 years ofservice to the Air Force in Europe. Witha functional and historical tie to the7329th Labor Service Unit (LSU) formedSeptember 8, 1950, USAFE CTS baskedin the memories of past and presentaccomplishments.

USAFE CTS has gone by manynames over the years and has beenaligned under varied commands.Originally designated the 7329th LSUand composed of local national civilianemployees, the unit was attached to the862nd Engineer Aviation Battalion. Itwas based in Germany at Rhein Main AirBase until May 1952, when it moved toRamstein AB.

The unit was redesignated the7002nd Civilian Service Unit in July 1963,falling under command of the HQUSAFE Civil Engineer. But it was notuntil May 1971 that the unit had its firstmilitary members assigned to maintainaircraft arresting systems. At this time,the unit activated as the 7002nd CivilEngineering Flight.

Known worldwide as “The Deuce,”

the unit picked up the 7219th and 7319thRED HORSE CEFs in June 1990. In June1993, the unit was redesignated the702nd Civil Engineer Squadron. Thischange was short-lived as the unitchanged its name in July 1994 to the617th CES. In December 1997, the unittook its current designation as theUSAFE Construction and TrainingSquadron.

USAFE CTS provides three distinctmissions: construction, executedprimarily through the Civilian ServiceUnit, military training, and aircraftarresting system depot maintenance.

The construction flight hasconducted extensive projects in Libya,Morocco, Turkey, Spain, Greece, France,Italy, Slovakia, Slovenia, Saudi Arabia,Jordan, Hungary, England and Germany,with future projects scheduled inSlovakia, Israel, Egypt, Tunisia, theAzores and Uganda. These projectshave included runway construction andmarking, roads, parking areas, hangars,hospitals, churches, schools, bombingranges, and even a pipeline in Turkey.

The training flight trains all ofUSAFE’s civil engineer and servicessquadrons. This professional cadre ofinstructors conducts six-day Silver Flagcourses for up to 1,000 civil engineer and

services personnel a year as one of onlythree such sites in the Air Force. Inaddition, USAFE CTS has establishedMission Essential Equipment Training(MEET) courses that provide deployablepersonnel in-depth training on trouble-shooting and maintenance of deployableassets. When not conducting training,these instructors are often called uponby HQ USAFE to survey airfields andconduct time-sensitive constructionprojects. One such project was theconstruction of two aircraft hangars inApril 1999. These facilities were key toincreasing Predator Unmanned AerialVehicle support in the air war overSerbia.

The unit’s depot maintenancefunction is responsible for all depot-levelmaintenance and repair of fixed andmobile aircraft arresting systems withinthe command. With only 17 militarymembers, this section maintains 76barrier systems throughout Europe,North Africa and the Middle East. Theymaintain mobile aircraft arrestingsystems in support of HQ USAFE,NATO and Joint Chiefs of Staffexercises, daily flying operations andcontingencies.

The USAFE commander, GenGregory S. Martin, in his remarks during

the anniversary ceremony,observed, “Yours is a long andrich tradition of service that aroseout of the Berlin Airlift to shine inoperations ranging from Norwayto North Africa. Whetherresponding to high-priority, time-sensitive constructionrequirements, maintaining andrepairing aircraft arrestingsystems, or training our own civilengineers, your work is markedby excellence.”

Happy 50th, USAFE CTS!(SSgt Toby Dunlap)

(Left to right) A1C Brooke Tweedy,Lt Col Sean Saltzman, Herr KlausBeau and Col Glenn Haggstromprepare to cut the anniversarycake. (Photo courtesy USAFE CTS)

USAFE CTS Celebrates 50 Years of Service


Maj Gen George E. “Jud” Ellis, USAF(retired), former Director of Engineering andServices from 1986 to 1989, died of cancer inRiverton, Wyo., Jan. 12. He was 64.

General Ellis was known as an inno-vator for his readiness to try new techno-logies and management systems and as astalwart supporter of civil engineering’sability to meet its wartime mission.

Ellis was born in 1936 in Millinocket,Maine. He graduated from the U.S. Mili-tary Academy at West Point in 1958. Helater earned a Master of Science degree insystems analysis from Arizona StateUniversity and a Master of BusinessAdministration from George WashingtonUniversity. He began his Air Force careeras a pilot trainee, but humbly admitted ina 1983 Engineering and ServicesQuarterly interview that, “I didn’t fly theT-33 very well … and for my sake and theAir Force’s, they asked me to fly anengineering desk.”

One of his first assignments as anengineer was advisor to the Vietnameseair force base commander at Tan SonNhut Air Base, Republic of Vietnam,where he said he “learned patience in anenvironment that was full of frustration.”

It was a lesson that served him well inlater assignments, particularly as thedeputy chief of staff for engineering andservices at Tactical Air Command. There,he oversaw a massive refurbishment of

TAC facilities under long-time TACcommander Gen. Wilbur Creech and thetransition of civil engineering to thepersonal computer age. At a time whencomputers were generally considered toys,he saw their value as a management tool.

“I was convinced that managing3,000 job orders per base, per month,could not be done effectively with astubby pencil.” He helped bring the firstdesktop computers, WANGs, to civilengineering. But before he could go outand buy them, he had to sell the idea tohis own staff. “I didn’t force the terminalson anybody. I said, ‘Use them if you wantto.’” They did, and soon wondered howthey ever got along without them.

While interested in exploiting thelatest technologies, Ellis never forgot thatthe primary mission of civil engineers is tosupport the warfighter. “We will not go towar without blue suit engineering folks.We are part of the varsity, the first team,”he emphasized.

During his tenure, Ellis revitalizedPrime BEEF training and was an avidpromoter of RED HORSE and theReadiness Challenge competition. Hestrongly believed that civil engineersshould train the way they deploy and, infact, many of his ideas are still in placetoday. The Readiness Challenge EllisAward is named in his honor.

Ellis retired in 1989 but remainedinvolved in the career field as a CEFounder. His management style,sometimes referred to as “contagiousmotivation,” endeared him to hiscolleagues and his troops, a number ofwhom were able to attend his finalfarewell in Riverton Jan. 17. (Compiled bythe Air Force Civil Engineer SupportAgency public affairs and historyoffices.)

Editor’s note: The Directorate ofEngineering and Services was theprecursor organization to the office ofThe Air Force Civil Engineer (HQ USAF/ILE), from 1975 to 1991.

SrA Corey Farkas, 10th CES, U.S. Air Force Academy,Colo., stands at the podium after receiving the Silver Medal forthe 130-kg weight division at the 19th World Wrestling Cham-pionships held at Camp Lejeune Marine Corps Base, N.C., onOct. 26, 2000. The Conseil International du Sport Militaire(CISM) 19th World Military Wrestling Championship is a multi-national wrestling tournament hosted by Lejeune. Competingnations included: Brazil, China, Estonia, Finland, Germany,Greece, Slovakia, Turkey, the United States and Vietnam.

Founded in 1948, CISM is one of the largest multi-disciplinary organizations in the world. With a motto of “Friend-ship Through Sport,” CISM, with its 122 member nations, usesthe playing field to unite armed forces of countries that mayhave previously confronted each other due to political orideological differences. (Photo by SSgt Larry A. Simmons)

‘Friendship Through Sport’

Maj Gen George E Ellis

Major General George E. Ellis1936-2001


Air Force Water, Energy Conservation Efforts Earn FederalAwards

Out of crisis came rewards for threeof the four Air Force organizationsreceiving the Department of Energy’sFederal Energy and Water ManagementAwards. Continued success in meetingfederal energy goals helped the fourth.

The awards were presented toRandolph and Dyess Air Force Bases,Texas; March Air Reserve Base, Calif.;and the Air Force Civil Engineer SupportAgency, Tyndall AFB, Fla., at a cere-mony in Washington D.C. October 12.

The two Texas bases faced excep-tional challenges because of extremedrought conditions in the state. Dyessreceived DoE’s Water Conservation/Beneficial Landscaping Awardafter civil engineers therehelped reduce waterconsumption on base by30 percent when thenearby city of Abileneimplemented mandatorywater rationing.Abilene supplieswater to the base.

“We anticipatedrationing wouldhappen and actuallystarted about twomonths before Abilenebegan rationing,” saidTom Denslow, Dyessenergy manager.

Although the entire base commu-nity did its part to conserve water,Denslow said the bulk of the creditbelongs to the base civil engineers. “Thesoil here is clay, and when it dries theground starts to move about, causingpipes to break and joints to give out,” hesaid. “They had to respond daily to waterbreaks.”

A few hundred miles to the south,engineers at Randolph faced similarproblems. “We had about 90 days thatsummer without rain,” said JosephHockaday, Randolph’s water programmanager. “We had cracks in the groundthat were so big cats and small dogswould fall in — literally.”

Randolph, like the rest of the SanAntonio area, receives its water from anaquifer, but drought conditions forced

city and government officials to placestrict pumping limits on it. “It was beingdrawn down too low,” said Hockaday.“That threatened streams about 25 milesnorth of the base, which threatenedseveral endangered species living in thestreams.”

Those limitations forced civilengineers to look at creative ways to savewater. By repairing water distributionsystems, recycling nonpotable reusewater, limiting landscape watering andcurtailing some activities such as flushingsewer lines and filling backyard pools, thebase remained 1.6 million gallons belowits yearly water target. The key, Hockaday

said, was involving the entire basecommunity, keeping them informed, andencouraging their participation. “Thisraised everybody’s awareness about theneed to conserve.” And it earned thebase DoE’s Water Conservation/Beneficial Landscaping Award.

In California, dry weather for oncewas not the problem; cutting through aforest of paperwork to construct anenergy management plan was. In 1996,March AFB transitioned from an activeduty base to a Reserve/Air NationalGuard base under Base Realignment andClosure actions. In the turmoil of thetransition, documentation of energy andutility management programs became“practically non-existent,” and reports,energy baseline memorandums ofagreement and utility sales agreements

often were ignored or misplaced.“I walked into an office stacked at

least five feet high with boxes andthought, ‘What am I getting myselfinto?’” said Frank Malinick, energy pro-gram manager for the 452nd Air MobilityWing. He and resource managementspecialist Mari French chopped down thepile and were able to begin shaping anenergy program for the base. “We finallygot all the paperwork up to date andwe’ve managed to get everythingstraightened out,” he said. “We’re not100 percent, but considering where westarted, we’re doing okay.” Okay enoughfor the wing to receive the DoEExceptional Service Award (small group).

While there was no crisis for the AirForce Civil Engineer Support Agency, itwas rewarded for continuing to developcreative ways to meet federally-mandatedenergy goals for the Air Force. Theagency received DoE’s AlternativeFinancing Projects Award (small groupcategory) for its use of Energy SavingsPerformance Contracts to help meet thosegoals.

ESPCs are agreements betweenprivate industry and DoD to install andmaintain performance-enhancing, energy-efficient equipment on installations. Theagency assisted installations in awarding16 ESPCs last year that collectivelyshould save the Air Force more than abillion dollars over a 25-year period.

“It’s definitely a win-win program,”said Rich Bauman, one of AFCESA’senergy project managers. “We getimproved performance with little or noexpenditure on our part, and companiesmake a profit from any energy savingsthat may result.”

Former President Clinton ordered allfederal agencies to reduce energyconsumption by 35 percent by 2010(reductions are based on a baselineestablished in 1985). “We’ve aggressive-ly pursued ESPCs as a way of helpingbases meet that goal, and we’re on targetfor meeting them on time,” Bauman said.(Michael A. Ward, HQ AFCESA PublicAffairs)


General Officers

HQ USAF Maj Gen Robbins, Earnest O. II Pentagon The Civil EngineerHQ AFMC Brig Gen Cannan, David M. Wright-Patterson AFB The Civil EngineerHQ DeCA Maj Gen Courter, Robert J. Jr. Fort Lee Director, Defense Commissary AgencyHQ AMC Brig Gen Fox, L. Dean Scott AFB Director, Civil EngineeringHQ AFMC Maj Gen Stewart, Todd I. Wright-Patterson AFB Director, Plans and Programs

Colonels

HQ USAFE Alston, Lavon Ramstein AB Deputy Civil EngineerAETC Amend, Joseph H. III Wright-Patterson AFB Dean, CE and SVS School, AFITAFELM NATO Anderson, Benjamin AFSOUTH/Naples Director, OPS InfrastructureAFRC Angel, Edward (AF Res) Barksdale AFB Commander, Det 1, 307 RHSAFSPC Augustenborg, Jay (AF Res) Malmstrom AFB IMA to 341 SW CommanderHQ AMC Baldetti, Peter J. Scott AFB Chief, Planning and Programming DivisionSAF/MII Baldwin, Carey Pentagon Director for Facility ManagementHQ AFCESA Barthold, Bruce R. Tyndall AFB Commander, AF Civil Engineer Support AgencyPACOM Baughman, James D. Yongsan Army Post DACOS, Engineer, HQ ROK/US CFCUSSPACECOM Bednar, Byron J. (AF Res) Peterson AFB IMA to the J4AFMC Bird, David F. Jr. Eglin AFB Commander, 96 ABWUSAFA Borges, Scott K. USAF Academy The Civil Engineer/Commander, 10 CEGAMC Brackett, James S. (sel) Scott AFB Commander, 375 CESOSD Bradshaw, Joel C. III Pentagon Chief, Air Force ProgramsUSAFA Bratlien, Michael D. (AF Res) USAF Academy MA to the SuperintendentOH ANG Brazeau, Richard L. (ANG) Camp Perry Commander, 200 RHSHQ AFCESA Brendel, Lance C. Tyndall AFB Director, Operations SupportHQ PACAF Bridges, Timothy K. (sel) Hickam AFB Chief, Environmental DivisionAETC Brittenham, Larry W. (sel) Maxwell AFB Air War College studentHQ ACC Burns, Patrick A. Langley AFB The Civil EngineerHQ USAF Byers, Timothy A. Pentagon Chief, Readiness & Installation Support DivisionHQ AFSPC Carmody, Cornelius J. “Connie” Peterson AFB The Civil EngineerHQ USAF Chafin, James T. (AF Res) Pentagon IMA to Director of Plans and IntegrationAETC Chisholm, MaryAnn H. Maxwell AFB Air War College studentHQ AFCEE Coke, Ronnie L. Brooks AFB Director, Environmental RestorationAMC Coker, Gregory W. (sel) Dover AFB Deputy Commander, 436 SPTGFL ANG Cook, Jere (ANG) Camp Blanding Commander, 202 RHSHQ AFCESA Cook, Michael J. Tyndall AFB Director, Technical SupportPACAF Coullahan, Patrick M. Elmendorf AFB Deputy Commander, 611 ASG/Eleventh Air Force Civil EngineerAETC Correll, Mark A. (sel) Maxwell AFB Air War College studentAETC Crummett, Thurlow E. “Terry” Sheppard AFB Commander, 366 TRSHQ ACC/DRMC Daly, Patrick R. Langley AFB Chief, Agile Combat Support Mission Area TeamHQ PACAF DeFoliart, David W. Hickam AFB The Civil EngineerUSAFE Dinsmore, Raymond E. (sel) RAF Mildenhall Deputy Commander, 100 SPTGHQ ACC DiRosario, Joseph P. Langley AFB Chief, Programs DivisionHQ PACAF Drake, William J. Hickam AFB Deputy Civil EngineerACC Eulberg, Delwyn R. Nellis AFB Commander, 99 ABWHQ USAF Fadok, Faith H. (AF Res) Pentagon IMA to the Engineering Division ChiefHQ USAFE Fernandez, Richard Ramstein AB Chief, Programs DivisionHQ USAFE Fetter, Clifford C. Ramstein AB Chief, Environmental DivisionHQ AETC Fink, Patrick T. (BSC) Randolph AFB Chief, Environmental DivisionPACAF Fisher, Charles B. Yokota AB Chief, Civil Engineering, Fifth Air ForceHQ USAF Fisher, Marvin N. (sel) Pentagon Deputy Chief, Programs DivisionHQ AMC Fitz, Michael S. Scott AFB Deputy Director, Civil EngineeringAETC Floyd, William R. Sheppard AFB Commander, 782 TRGPACAF Formwalt, William A. Kadena AB Commander, 18 CEGPACAF Fouser, John D. Kunsan AB Commander, 8 SPTGUSAFA Fryer, Richard A. Jr. (sel) USAF Academy Commander, 510 CES

Civil Engineer SeniorCivil Engineer SeniorCivil Engineer SeniorCivil Engineer SeniorCivil Engineer SeniorOfficers and CiviliansOfficers and CiviliansOfficers and CiviliansOfficers and CiviliansOfficers and Civilians


HQ ACC Fukey, Michael F. (Pilot) Langley AFB Chief, Base Support DivisionPACAF Gaffney, Timothy P. (sel) Misawa AB Commander, 35 CESHQ AFCEE Garcia, Samuel E. Brooks AFB Executive DirectorHQ AETC Gilbert, Russell L. “Rusty” Randolph AFB The Civil EngineerAETC Green, Gordon S. (sel) Lackland AFB Commander, 37 CESHQ USAF Greenough, William T. (sel) Pentagon Chief, Plans and Policy BranchHQ AMC Griffin, Bobbie L. Jr. (sel) Scott AFB Chief, Environmental Programs DivisionHQ AFMC Griffith, Thomas M. Wright-Patterson AFB Chief, Programs and Operations DivisionHQ AETC Guy, Homer L. Randolph AFB Chief, Engineering DivisionHQ USAFE Haggstrom, Glenn D. Ramstein AB The Civil EngineerOSD/RA Hart, Thomas H. (AF Res) Pentagon Deputy Director, Environmental Mgmt.HQ USAF Hartman, Albert S. (AF Res) Pentagon IMA to the Housing Division ChiefAFRC Haulman, David (sel) (AF Res) Barksdale AFB Commander, 917 CESHQ PACAF Hayden, Thomas F. III Hickam AFB Chief, Readiness DivisionAFRC Haythorn, Thomas B. (AF Res) Dobbins ARB Commander, 628 CEFPACAF Hoarn, Steven E. Hickam AFB Commander, 15 CESMO ANG Hobbs, C. Ron (ANG) Lambert IAP Commander, 231 CEFSAF/MII Holland, James P. (sel) Pentagon Military AssistantAETC Horsfall, John D. Maxwell Director, Air University Inspector GeneralAMC Howe, Dave C. (sel) Andrews AFB Commander, 89 CESHQ PACAF Howell, Richard C. Hickam AFB Chief, Operations DivisionHQ AFSOC Hrapla, Michael F. Hurlburt Field The Civil EngineerHQ USAF Ingenloff, Richard J. Pentagon Chief, Engineering DivisionOASD/RA Jameson, Stephen A. (ANG) Pentagon Deputy Director, ConstructionAFRC Jamieson, Richard (AF Res) Kelly AFB Commander, 307 RHSHQ AMC Janiec, Gordon R. Scott AFB Chief, Operations DivisionAMC Jeffreys, John R. McChord AFB Director, RODEO 2002AETC Jeter, Drew D. (sel) Maxwell AFB Air War College studentAFMC Judkins, James E. Edwards AFB Commander, 95 CEGPACAF Kanno, Neil K. Osan AB Commander, 51 SPTGACC Keith, Edmond B. (sel) Langley AFB Commander, 1 CESHQ AFMC Kennedy, James R. Wright-Patterson AFB Chief, Organization and Privatization DivisionHQ USAF Kohlhaas, Karen D. (AF Res) Pentagon Assistant for Reserve AffairsAFSPC Kopp, Robert D. Vandenberg AFB Commander, 30 CESAFMC Korslund, Per A. Hill AFB Commander, 75 CEGACC Kuhlmann, Bryan L. (sel) Langley AFB AEFC/Combat Support DivisionHQ AFCESA Kuhns, James E. (AF Res) Tyndall AFB IMA to the CommanderHQ AMC Lally, Brian J. (AF Res) Scott AFB IMA to the Director, Civil EngineeringHQ PACAF Lancaster, Louis K. Hickam AFB Chief, Programs DivisionHQ AFRC Lemoi, Wayne T. (AF Res) Robins AFB Chief, Readiness DivisionAETC Leptrone, Jeffrey L. Maxwell AFB Air War College studentMD ANG Lew, Alan E. (ANG) Martin State Airport Commander, 235 CEFHQ AFRC Lillemon, Steven K. (sel) Robins AFB Chief, Environmental DivisionHQ USAF Loomis, Paula J. (sel) (AF Res) Pentagon IMA to Environmental Division ChiefACC Lyon, James D. Holloman AFB Commander, 49 MMGHQ USAFE Macon, William P. (sel) Ramstein AB Chief, Readiness DivisionACC Mayfield, Edward D. Hurlburt Field Commander, 823 RHSUSEUCOM McClellan, Richard G. Garmisch, Germany Student, George C. Marshall CenterHQ AFCESA McConnell, Bruce F. Tyndall AFB Director, Contingency SupportAMC Medeiros, John S. (sel) McChord AFB Deputy Commander, 62 SPTGHQ USAF Miller, Brian L. Pentagon Chief, Environmental DivisionHQ AFCEE Miller, Ross N. (BSC) Brooks AFB Director, Environmental QualityACC Minto, Paul E. Nellis AFB Commander, 820 RHSHQ AFCESA Moreau, David C. (ANG) Tyndall AFB, FL CE ANG AdvisorAFSPC CES Mykes, Terrance G. Peterson AFB Commander, Civil Engineer FlightAFMC Norrie, Michael D. Robins AFB Commander, 78 CEGHQ AFSPC Parker, Richard P. Peterson AFB Deputy Civil EngineerAETC Patrick, Leonard A. (sel) Randolph AFB Commander, 12 CESOSD Peters, David T. Pentagon Pollution Prevention Team LeaderUSAFE Pokora, Edward J. Ramstein AB Commander, 86 CEGAFMC Purvis, Quincy D. Eglin AFB Commander, 96 CEGHQ AFMC Quinn, William R. Wright-Patterson AFB Chief, Engineering and Construction Division/AFMC CES/CC11 Wing Richardson, Cardell K. Bolling AFB Commander, 11 SPTGHQ USAF Ritenour, Donald L. (AF Res) Pentagon MA to The Civil EngineerPACAF Rojko, Paul M. Osan AB Seventh Air Force Civil EngineerAETC Romano, Sebastian V. Randolph AFB Commander, 12 SPTGAFCEE Rosson, Roark M. (AF Res) Brooks AFB IMA to the Director


AFRC Russell, John P. Jr. (sel) (AF Res) Scott AFB Commander, 932 SPTGHQ ACC Ryburn, James T. Langley AFB Chief, Readiness DivisionAFMC Saunders, William R. (sel) Los Angeles AFB 61 Air Base Group Civil EngineerHQ AFSPC Schmidt, Michael H. Peterson AFB Chief, Programs DivisionHQ AFRC Scrafford, Andrew R. (sel) Robins AFB Chief, Engineering DivisionUSAFA Seely, Gregory E. (BSC) USAF Academy Prof. & Dept. Head, Civil & Environmental EngineeringOSD Selstrom, John P. Jr. Pentagon Environmental Restoration Program ManagerHQ USAF Sharp, Kerry L. (AF Res) Pentagon IMA to the Programs Division ChiefHQ ACC Shelton, Kenneth P. (sel) Langley AFB Chief, Environmental DivisionPACAF Showers, Duncan H. “Scott” Elmendorf AFB Commander, 3 CESHQ AETC Singel, Kenneth R. Randolph AFB Chief, Programs DivisionAMC Smiley, Charles P. (sel) McGuire AFB Commander, 305 CESHQ USAF Smith, Emmitt G. Pentagon Chief, Housing DivisionJCS Snyder, Cynthia G. (sel) Pentagon J4 Joint Staff Engineer OfficerHQ USAF Somers, Paul W. Pentagon Chief, Privatization DivisionHQ AFSOC Speake, Nancy L. Hurlburt Field Chief, Engineering DivisionCO ANG Sprenkle, Dave (ANG) Buckley AFB Commander, 240 CEFHQ AFMC Stanley, Tad A. Wright-Patterson AFB Deputy Civil EngineerHQ ACC Stephens, Eric L. (AF Res) Langley AFB IMA to The Civil EngineerSAF/MIQ Stern, Edmund H. (ANG) Pentagon ANG Advisor to SAF/MIQAMC Streifert, Scott F. Travis AFB Commander, 60 SPTGHQ ANG Stritzinger, Janice M. (ANG) Andrews AFB The ANG Civil EngineerHQ AFCEE Strom, Randie A. Brooks AFB Director, Environmental Conservation & PlanningHQ ACC Sweat, David A. Langley AFB Deputy Civil Engineer11 Wing Thady, Randall J. Bolling AFB Commander, 11 CESUSAFE Thorpe, York D. (sel) RAF Mildenhall Commander, 100 CESHQ AFSPC Tickel, J. Carlton Peterson AFB Special Assistant to the Vice CommanderAETC Tinsley, Hal M. Sheppard AFB Commander, 82 CESHQ AIA/XPC Torchia, Linden J. (sel) Kelly AFB Chief, Civil Engineer DivisionHQ AETC Turner, Randall L. Randolph AFB Chief, Operations DivisionSAF/MII Vazquez, Luis A. (AF Res) Pentagon Assistant for Reserve AffairsHQ AFRC Verlinde, Jon D. Robins AFB The Civil EngineerHQ AFMC Wallington, Cary R. Wright-Patterson AFB Deputy, Installations and SupportAFRC West, Robert G. (sel) (AF Res) NAS/JRB, Texas Commander, 301 CESHQ USAF Whalen, Daniel P. (sel) (AF Res) Pentagon IMA to Readiness and Installation Support Division ChiefACC White, Arvil E. III Nellis AFB Commander, 99 CESHQ AFMC Wittliff, Danny J. (AF Res) Wright-Patterson AFB IMA to The Civil EngineerACC Woods, Clinton C. Malmstrom AFB Commander, 819 RHSAETC Worrell, Josuelito (sel) Maxwell AFB Air War College studentHQ USAF Zander, Steven W. (sel) Pentagon Chief, Housing Investment BranchHQ AFSPC Zelenok, David S. (AF Res) Schriever AFB IMA to 50 Space Wing Commander

Senior Executive Service

HQ USAF Aimone, Michael A. Pentagon The Deputy Civil EngineerHQ AFCEE Erickson, Gary M. Brooks AFB Director, Air Force Center for Environmental ExcellenceAFBCA Lowas, Albert F. Jr. Arlington VA Director, Air Force Base Conversion Agency

GS/GM-15s

HQ AFCESA Anderson, Myron C. Tyndall AFB Chief, Civil and Pavements DivisionHQ AFCEE Bakunas, Edward J. Brooks AFB Chief, Comprehensive PlanningHQ USAF Barrett, Robert C. III Pentagon Chief, Programs and Analysis BranchHQ AFMC Bek, David J. Wright-Patterson AFB Chief, Resources DivisionUSSOCOM Bosse, Harold MacDill AFB The Civil EngineerHQ AFSPC Bratlien, Michael D. Peterson AFB Chief, Engineering DivisionAFBCA Brunner, Paul G. McClellan AFB BRAC Environmental CoordinatorAFMC Clark, Michael J. Eglin AFB Deputy Base Civil EngineerHQ ANG Conte, Ralph Andrews AFB Chief, Programming DivisionAFBCA Corradetti, John J. Jr. Arlington VA Program Manager, Division AHQ USAF Corsetti, William V. Pentagon Rotation, Strategic Planner, J5, Strategy DivisionAFMC Coyle, Stephen Robins AFB Director, Environmental ManagementHQ AFRC Culpepper, Hilton F. Robins AFB Assistant Civil EngineerAFMC Dalpias, E. Allan Hill AFB Director, Environmental ManagementHQ AFCESA Daugherty, Patrick C. Tyndall AFB Air War CollegeAFREA Edwards, William E. Bolling AFB Director, AF Real Estate Agency


HQ AFCESA Einwaechter, James R. Tyndall AFB Executive DirectorHQ ACC Firman, Dennis M. Langley AFB Chief, Construction DivisionAFBCA Frank, Joyce K. Arlington VA Deputy Director, Air Force Base Conversion AgencyHQ USAF Franklin, George H. Jr. Pentagon Chief, Housing Privatization BranchHQ PACAF Fujimoto, George S. Hickam AFB Chief, Environmental Restoration BranchAFMC Gray, William G. Arnold AFB Technical DirectorHQ USAF Halvorson, Kathryn M. Pentagon Deputy Chief, Housing DivisionAFMC Harstad, Richard D. Wright-Patterson AFB Chief, Acquisition ESH DivisionAFBCA Jackson, Dale O. Arlington VA DLAMP Rotation, Army Corps of EngineersAFMC Johnson, Gary K. Wright-Patterson AFB Director, 88 Civil Engineer DirectorateAFBCA Kempster, Thomas B. McClellan AFB Senior RepresentativeAFBCA Leehy, Lawrence R. Pentagon Program Manager, Division CHQ AFCEE Leighton, Bruce R. Brooks AFB Technical Assistant, Environmental Conservation PlanningAFMC Lester, Ronald J. Wright-Patterson AFB Director, Environmental ManagementAFCEE Lopez, Edward Dallas TX Director, Central Region Environmental OfficeAFSPC Lowsley, James P. Vandenberg AFB Deputy Base Civil EngineerHQ AMC Mack, Robert D. Scott AFB Chief, Housing DivisionHQ AFSPC Maher, Gary Peterson AFB Chief, Environmental DivisionHQ USAF Maldonado, Rita J. Pentagon Chief, Operation & Maintenance DivisionHQ USAF McGhee, Michael Pentagon Chief, Environmental Quality BranchHQ USAF Moore, Robert M. Pentagon Chief, Program Management BranchHQ AFMC Mundey, Karl J. Wright-Patterson AFB Chief, Environmental DivisionHQ AFCEE Nelson, Glenn E. Jr. Brooks AFB Technical Assistant, Environmental RestorationHQ AFCEE Noack, Edward G. Brooks AFB Director, Financial Management & Mission SupportHQ ACC Parker, Paul A. Langley AFB Chief, Operations & Infrastructure DivisionAFCEE Pennino, James San Francisco CA Director, Western Region Environmental OfficeHQ AFCEE Perritt, Rolan M. Brooks AFB Chief, Design Group DivisionHQ USAF Pohlman, Teresa Washington D.C. Special Assistant to the Deputy Civil EngineerAFMC Polce, Ronald L. Arnold AFB Technical Director for FacilitiesHQ AFCEE Potter, Perry Brooks AFB Chief, Housing Privatization DivisionAFBCA Reinertson, Kenneth Pentagon Program Manager, Division DHQ AFCEE Ritenour, Donald L. Brooks AFB Director, Design and ConstructionHQ AFMC Sculimbrene, Anthony F. Wright-Patterson AFB Exec. Director, Dayton Aviation Heritage Federal CommissionHQ USAFE Shebaro, Bassim D. Ramstein AB Chief, Engineering DivisionAFCEE Sims, Thomas D. Atlanta GA Director, Eastern Region Environmental OfficeAFBCA Smith, John Edward B. Arlington VA Chief, Environmental Programs and PlansAFMC Stephens, Eric L. Brooks AFB Human Systems EngineerHQ AFCEE Tanner, Gordon Brooks AFB Legal AdvisorAFMC Tuss, Margarita Q. Wright-Patterson AFB Chief, Engineering DivisionHQ AMC Van Buren, John L. Scott AFB Chief, Engineering DivisionHQ ANG VanGasbeck, David C. Andrews AFB Chief, Environmental DivisionAFMC Whitney, Richard G. Wright-Patterson AFB Chief, Acquisition ESH DivisionHQ ANG Whitt, William B. Andrews AFB Chief, Engineering DivisionAFMC Wood, Richard A. Edwards AFB Director, Environmental ProtectionHQ PACAF Yasumoto, Stanley Y. Hickam AFB Chief, Engineering DivisionSAF/MIQ Yonkers, Terry A. Pentagon Deputy for Resource ManagementHQ AETC Zugay, Anthony Randolph AFB Deputy Civil Engineer

Smoke from a major wildfire obscures the skyline pastthe entrance to Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif. Thenearly 10,000 acre fire began off base September 13,but grew and quickly moved on base, eventuallymaking its way into an area called the Barka Slough.There it began to feed off a huge, naturally occurringunderground peat reservoir. Base and civilian fire unitswere able to contain the surface fire in about threedays, however the underground fire continues to burn.(Photo by TSgt Scott Wagers)

Date post:	17-Oct-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Winter 00-01...Title: Winter 00-01.pmd Author: James.Cline Created Date: 4/17/2003 5:55:57 PM

Documents