In the News Would Take Care of This

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

In the News Would Take Care of This troller is responsible for ensuring that resources expended on financial statement preparation are minimized until the reporting entity can demonstrate that it is ready for audit. Typically the financial management community In the News would take care of this. But military equipment is unique. Information about military equipment must be obtained from the acquisition and logistics communities, so indi- THE AUDITORS ARE COMING! THE viduals in these communities are required to assert to AUDITORS ARE COMING! the accuracy of the information they give to the finan- Richard K. Sylvester cial management community. In fact, these communi- f you’re an acquisition professional who works with ties are involved in four management assertions: military equipment programs, you need to prepare • The Valuation Assertion, which verifies that the assets Ifor one of the biggest New Year’s events in Depart- have been valued in accordance with federal accounting ment of Defense history. No, we’re not having a huge standards and generally accepted accounting princi- party, but we are sending out a serious invitation. ples • The Completeness Assertion, which verifies that all the In early 2007, the inspector general is going to invite in- programs on the Property, Plant & Equipment (PP&E) dependent auditors to begin their audit of DoD’s mili- line item of the balance sheet that should have been tary equipment programs. And here’s the good news: reported have been recorded and reported We’ll be ready for the auditors, thanks to the Military Equipment Valuation (MEV) initiative. Preparing our military equipment In case you haven’t heard, MEV is a DoD-wide effort to programs for audit is the law. capitalize, depreciate, properly account for, and report military equipment. Basically, we’re treating military equipment as capitalized assets instead of expenses, pro- • The Rights and Obligations Assertion, which verifies rating their value over their useful life and recording those that the Service reporting the item does in fact have values on financial statements that are subject to audit. the rights to and “owns” the equipment • The Existence Assertion, which verifies that the mili- With the help of program management offices across tary equipment being reported does in fact exist. the Department, the Property & Equipment (P&E) Pol- icy Office has established the initial value of each item Working with the military departments and defense agen- of military equipment in the DoD inventory, using a con- cies, the P&E Policy Office developed a recommended sistent approach that can be audited. Now we have to approach for completing the assertions. To learn more update that program information and ensure it’s ready about that approach, visit <www.acq.osd.mil/me>and for audit. click on “Management Assertion Training” in the Quick Links menu. Updates in CAMS-ME: Due September 30, 2006 The Capital Asset Management System-Military Equip- Dotting the I’s and Crossing the T’s for Our ment (CAMS-ME) is the system that the P&E Policy Of- Warfighters fice and the Space and Naval Warfare (SPAWAR) System Preparing our military equipment programs for audit is Center-San Diego have developed to consolidate the av- the law. It also has tremendous benefits: It demonstrates erage cost of assets, update total program expenditures, renewed responsibility to the taxpayer, and it gives se- depreciate assets over their useful life, and record asset nior management officials the ability to approach Con- status. Points of contact who have already been desig- gress and the American people with better knowledge nated in all of the Services will use the CAMS-ME portal of our military equipment programs—and not just the Web-based tool to update their military equipment ad- number of vehicles, ships, and planes, but also what each dition, disposal, and transfer data. Training on CAMS- costs, its current value, and how long it will operate. Ul- ME for POCs is now being offered as a Web-based mod- timately, this information, verified by an independent ule, accessible from the Quick Links menu on our Web auditor, will help us to make investment decisions that site: <www.acq.osd.mil/me>. provide the best support for our warfighters. Management Assertion for Audit Readiness: Due Sylvester is deputy director for property & equipment pol- December 31, 2006 icy within the Acquisition, Resources and Analysis Office, According to Section 1008 of the 2002 National Defense Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (AT&L). Authorization Act, the under secretary of defense comp- Defense AT&L: July-August 2006 48 In the News ARMY NEWS SERVICE (FEB. 22, 2006) and direction from concept to capability development ARMY CREATES NEW CAPABILITIES for full spectrum operations, as well as shape the future INTEGRATION CENTER for the next generation of soldiers. ASHINGTON—The Secretary of the Army signed a General Order Feb. 15, to roll out The ARCIC, through the TRADOC commanding general, Wthe Army’s organization responsible for in- will be responsible to the Army Secretary and Army Chief tegrating Future Combat Systems capabilities into the of Staff. It will be headquartered at Fort Monroe, Va., with force as soon as practical. a forward element in Arlington, Va. The National Capi- tal Region office will be responsible for working with the The Army Capabilities Integration Center, or ARCIC, was Army Staff, Joint Staff, Office of the Secretary of Defense, formed from the resources and organization of the U.S. and other agencies. Army Training and Doctrine Command Futures Center. “The ARCIC is responsible for integrating and synchro- With the new name and new mission, the ARCIC will be nizing the activities of many separate agencies and Head- the lead Army agency for coordinating how best to in- quarters Department of the Army elements,” said Col. tegrate warfighting capabilities into the force and among Rickey Smith, director of the ARCIC-Forward. “Currently, the military services and with other agencies. many segments of our Army individually provide pieces of the overall DOTMLPF composite picture. The ARCIC “We are retaining the complete mission set from the Fu- will lead in determining if the right force capability re- tures Center and adding the tremendous responsibility quirements are being worked, or whether we are clos- for integrating capabilities into the modular force,” said ing the gaps needed to support our soldiers and leaders Lt. Gen. J. Mark Curran at a media roundtable Feb. 16 for today’s and tomorrow’s requirements.” during the Winter Association of the United States Army conference in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. Curran, formerly di- This represents a significant change in how the Army rector of the Futures Center, will serve as the ARCIC’s di- does business, Smith said. rector. “The ARCIC represents a real, tangible shift,” he said. “This integration goes beyond materiel items and in- “Here are two examples. In the very near future, the cludes all DOTMLPF (doctrine, organization, training, ma- Army will establish an Evaluation Brigade Combat Team teriel, leader development, personnel, and facilities) do- for the purpose of evaluating and testing FCS technolo- mains,” Curran said. “We must work the synchronization gies in order to spin them out to the modular force. The and coordination of agencies across the Army and the ARCIC will have the key role in determining what the Joint community to ensure we accelerate inserting ca- EBCT tests, and determining whether these technologies pabilities into the modular force, when these are ready, meet the requirements. to meet an essential need.” “The ARCIC will also serve as the soldier’s representa- The ARCIC’s responsibilities will include the Future Com- tive, ensuring that requirements are being met,” he said. bat Systems, the modernization program for the Army to move from the current force to the future force. The Since wargaming, concept development, and experi- program provides soldiers with leading-edge technolo- mentation across DoD have implications for the fielding gies to improve their capabilities in fighting the enemy of needed capabilities to the current and future Joint in complex environments. Force commander, “The ARCIC is a permanent organi- zation designed to serve as the coordinating agent among “Our role in inserting (Future Combat Systems) capa- all stakeholders involved in the force capability require- bilities into the force when ready is critical to enabling ments process, including requirements identification and the Army to evolve rapidly while engaged in this long integration,” Smith said. war,” Curran said. “The Future Combat Systems program is the fastest, surest way to modernize the Army.” “The ARCIC will stay engaged at all levels to ensure in- tegrated current and future force developments are con- The ARCIC’s work will pave the way for brigade combat sidered in the sister services, Joint Staff, and Army ac- teams to use Future Combat Systems technologies, ac- quisition and budget decisions,” Smith said. “Decisions cording to Army senior leaders. It will provide impetus that affect Army capabilities now and in the future will 49 Defense AT&L: July-August 2006 In the News cause us to re-examine our operational Maintainers have to work supply line concepts and shift our priorities and issues—making sure needed parts are resources accordingly.” on hand among other things, building a work area specifically for the F-22, Editor’s note: Information provided by and developing training requirements the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine for mechanics. Command Public Affairs Office. “Most maintainers will tell you that OGDEN AIR LOGISTICS being on the ground floor of a new CENTER PUBLIC AFFAIRS weapon system is unique,” said (FEB. 23, 2006) Dooner. “A lot of hard work goes into RAPTOR CAPABILITIES getting it off the ground but in the end, PRESENT NEW you have the opportunity to implement CHALLENGES new ideas and ways of doing business.
Recommended publications
  • Air & Space Power Journal
    July–August 2013 Volume 27, No. 4 AFRP 10-1 Senior Leader Perspective The Air Advisor ❙ 4 The Face of US Air Force Engagement Maj Gen Timothy M. Zadalis, USAF Features The Swarm, the Cloud, and the Importance of Getting There First ❙ 14 What’s at Stake in the Remote Aviation Culture Debate Maj David J. Blair, USAF Capt Nick Helms, USAF The Next Lightweight Fighter ❙ 39 Not Your Grandfather’s Combat Aircraft Col Michael W. Pietrucha, USAF Building Partnership Capacity by Using MQ-9s in the Asia-Pacific ❙ 59 Col Andrew A. Torelli, USAF Personnel Security during Joint Operations with Foreign Military Forces ❙ 79 David C. Aykens Departments 101 ❙ Views The Glass Ceiling for Remotely Piloted Aircraft ❙ 101 Lt Col Lawrence Spinetta, PhD, USAF Funding Cyberspace: The Case for an Air Force Venture Capital Initiative ❙ 119 Maj Chadwick M. Steipp, USAF Strategic Distraction: The Consequence of Neglecting Organizational Design ❙ 129 Col John F. Price Jr., USAF 140 ❙ Book Reviews Master of the Air: William Tunner and the Success of Military Airlift . 140 Robert A. Slayton Reviewer: Frank Kalesnik, PhD Selling Air Power: Military Aviation and American Popular Culture after World War II . 142 Steve Call Reviewer: Scott D. Murdock From Lexington to Baghdad and Beyond: War and Politics in the American Experience, 3rd ed . 144 Donald M. Snow and Dennis M. Drew Reviewer: Capt Chris Sanders, USAF Beer, Bacon, and Bullets: Culture in Coalition Warfare from Gallipoli to Iraq . 147 Gal Luft Reviewer: Col Chad T. Manske, USAF Global Air Power . 149 John Andreas Olsen, editor Reviewer: Lt Col P.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of the Air Force Materiel Command Reorganization Report for Congress
    CHILDREN AND FAMILIES The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and EDUCATION AND THE ARTS decisionmaking through research and analysis. ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE This electronic document was made available from www.rand.org as a public service INFRASTRUCTURE AND of the RAND Corporation. TRANSPORTATION INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS LAW AND BUSINESS Skip all front matter: Jump to Page 16 NATIONAL SECURITY POPULATION AND AGING PUBLIC SAFETY Support RAND SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Purchase this document TERRORISM AND Browse Reports & Bookstore HOMELAND SECURITY Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore RAND Project AIR FORCE View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non- commercial use only. Unauthorized posting of RAND electronic documents to a non-RAND website is prohibited. RAND electronic documents are protected under copyright law. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please see RAND Permissions. This report is part of the RAND Corporation research report series. RAND reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. Research Report Assessment of the Air Force Materiel Command Reorganization Report for Congress Don Snyder, Bernard Fox, Kristin F.
    [Show full text]
  • Photochart of USAF Leadership
    Photochart of USAF Leadership An Air Force Magazine Directory (As of Aug. 20, 2009) By June Lee, Editorial Associate Office of the Secretary of the Air Force Asst. Secretary of the Air Asst. Secretary of the Air Asst. Secretary of the Air Asst. Secretary of the Air Force Force (Acquisition) Force (Financial Mgmt. & Force (Installations, Envi- (Manpower & Reserve Affairs) David M. Van Buren Comptroller) ronment, & Logistics) Daniel B. Ginsberg (acting) Jamie M. Morin Debra K. Walker Secretary of the Air Force Michael B. Donley Deputy Undersecretary of Auditor General General Counsel Inspector General the Air Force Theodore J. Williams Charles A. Blanchard Lt. Gen. Marc E. Rogers (International Affairs) Bruce S. Lemkin Undersecretary of the Air Force Vacant Chief, Warfighting Integration & Director, Legislative Liaison Director, Public Affairs Director, Small Business Chief Information Officer Maj. Gen. Robin Rand Col. Les A. Kodlick Programs Lt. Gen. William T. Lord Ronald A. Poussard Senior Military Asst. to the Administrative Asst. Secretary of the Air Force to the Secretary Col. Charles H. Porter of the Air Force William A. Davidson 72 AIR FORCE Magazine / September 2009 The United States Air Force Air Staff Asst. Vice Chief of Staff Chief Master Sergeant Air Force Historian Judge Advocate General Lt. Gen. William L. Shelton of the Air Force Clarence R. Anderegg Lt. Gen. Jack L. Rives CMSAF James A. Roy Chief of Staff Gen. Norton A. Schwartz Surgeon General Chair, Scientific Advisory Board Chief of Chaplains Chief of Safety Lt. Gen. Charles B. Green John W. Betz Maj. Gen. Cecil R. Richardson Maj. Gen. Frederick F.
    [Show full text]
  • Afsc 21Mx Munitions and Missile Maintenance Officer Career Field
    DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE CFETP 21MX Headquarters, United States Air Force Parts I and II Washington, DC 20330-1030 12 November 2014 AFSC 21MX MUNITIONS AND MISSILE MAINTENANCE OFFICER CAREER FIELD EDUCATION AND TRAINING PLAN ACCESSIBILITY: Publications and forms are available on the e-publishing website at http://www.e- publishing.af.mil/ for downloading or ordering. RELEASABILITY: There are no releasability restrictions on this publication. The Missile Badge Heraldry The first distinctive missile badge was established May 23, 1958, to recognize those within the Air Force who had a direct role in the development, maintenance or operation of guided missiles. The badge was first called the Guided Missile Insignia and was authorized for those who performed duty in or were associated with the Snark, Atlas, Goose, Thor, Jupiter, Matador, Mace, Bomarc, Titan and Minuteman missile systems. In 1963, the name was changed to the Missileman Badge and three levels of expertise were established: Basic, Senior, and Master Missileman. The honor of wearing the badge went to those who completed specialized missile training. In April 1979, the name of the Missileman Badge was once again changed, this time to simply Missile Badge, deleting any reference to gender. In addition to the original missile systems, the Missile Badge is now awarded to personnel in the Peacekeeper, Air Launched Cruise Missile, Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile and Advanced Cruise Missile weapon systems. In 1988, with the approval of the “Missile Operations Designator,” a wreath encircling the Missile Badge, the original Missile Badge became a badge awarded exclusively to missile maintainers. In 2004, the Missile Badge was approved for wear by officers who had graduated the Conventional Munitions Officer Course and supervised 2M/W personnel in the maintenance, loading and unloading of guided missiles or missile systems for 12 months.
    [Show full text]
  • Major Connie L. Clay
    U N I T E D S T A T E S A I R F O R C E D S R F O R C E MAJOR CONNIE L. CLAY Major Connie Clay is currently the Director of Operations , 919th Force Support Squadron, 919th Mission Support Group, 919th Special Operations Wing , Duke Field, Florida. In h er current position, Major Clay oversees the operational and support readiness of a diverse group of over 1,200 wing personnel, providing personnel readiness, military personnel, manpower, education and training, and services support for one of Air Force Special Operations Command’s and Air Force Reserve Command’s most diverse reserve wings. Major Clay received her commission from the Air Force th rough ROTC and entered active duty in October 2000. She has served at multiple levels in the personnel career field to include acting as the first J1 in the newly established Office of the Defense Representative -Pakistan, Islamabad, Pakistan. Major Clay separated from active duty and became a reservist in 2005. She has deployed in support of Operations ENDURING FREEDOM and NEW DAWN and Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa . EDUCATION 2011 Air Command and Staff College ( Non-Residence) 2005 Squadron Officer School (Residence) 2003 Masters of Interdisciplinary Arts and Science, Touro University International 2000 Bachelor of Arts in Environmental Sciences , University of Washington ASSIGNMENTS 1. 2000 – 2002, Chief, Relocations and Employments, 62d Mission Support Squadron, McChord AFB, Washington 2. 2002-2003, Section Commander, 62d Logistics Readiness Squadron, McChord AFB, Washington 3. 2003 – 2003, Executive Officer, 62d Mission Support Group , McChord AFB, Washington 4.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Air Force Lieutenant General Arnold
    UNITED STATES AIR FORCE LIEUTENANT GENERAL ARNOLD W. BUNCH JR. Lt. Gen. Arnold W. Bunch, Jr., is the Military Deputy, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, the Pentagon, Washington, D.C. He is responsible for research and development, test, production, and modernization of Air Force programs worth more than $32 billion annually. General Bunch was commissioned in 1984 as a graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy. He completed undergraduate pilot training in 1985. He completed operational assignments as an instructor, evaluator and aircraft commander for B-52 Stratofortresses. Following graduation from the Air Force Test Pilot School, General Bunch conducted developmental testing in the B-2 Spirit and B-52 and served as an instructor in each. Additionally, he has commanded at the squadron, group and wing levels. Prior to his current assignment, he was the Commander of the Air Force Test Center, headquartered at Edwards Air Force Base, California. EDUCATION 1984 Bachelor of Science degree in civil engineering, U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, Colo. 1991 Squadron Officer School, Maxwell AFB, Ala. 1994 Master of Science degree in mechanical engineering, California State University Fresno 1996 Army Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, Kan. 2000 Master of Science degree in national security strategy, National War College, Fort Lesley J. McNair, Washington, D.C. ASSIGNMENTS 1. July 1984 - July 1985, Student, undergraduate pilot training, Columbus Air Force Base, Miss. 2. August 1985 - December 1985, Student, B-52 Combat Crew Training School, Castle AFB, Calif. 3. January 1986 - June 1990, Standardization and Evaluation Instructor Aircraft Commander, 325th Bomb Squadron, Fairchild AFB, Wash.
    [Show full text]
  • U N I T E D S T a T E S a I R F O R C E Lieutenant General
    U N I T E D S T A T E S A I R F O R C E LIEUTENANT GENERAL ARNOLD W. BUNCH JR. Lt. Gen. Arnold W. Bunch, Jr., is the Military Deputy, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, the Pentagon, Washington, D.C. He is responsible for research and development, test, production, and modernization of Air Force programs worth more than $32 billion annually. General Bunch was commissioned in 1984 as a graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy. He completed undergraduate pilot training in 1985. He completed operational assignments as an instructor, evaluator and aircraft commander for B­52 Stratofortresses. Following graduation from the Air Force Test Pilot School, General Bunch conducted developmental testing in the B­2 Spirit and B­52 and served as an instructor in each. Additionally, he has commanded at the squadron, group and wing levels. Prior to his current assignment, he was the Commander of the Air Force Test Center, headquartered at Edwards Air Force Base, California. EDUCATION 1984 Bachelor of Science degree in civil engineering, U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, Colo. 1991 Squadron Officer School, Maxwell AFB, Ala. 1994 Master of Science degree in mechanical engineering, California State University Fresno 1996 Army Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, Kan. 2000 Master of Science degree in national security strategy, National War College, Fort Lesley J. McNair, Washington, D.C. ASSIGNMENTS 1. July 1984 ­ July 1985, Student, undergraduate pilot training, Columbus Air Force Base, Miss. 2. August 1985 ­ December 1985, Student, B­52 Combat Crew Training School, Castle AFB, Calif.
    [Show full text]
  • FY 2001 MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, DEFENSE-WIDE ($ in Thousands)
    FY 2001 MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, DEFENSE-WIDE ($ in Thousands) New/ Authorization Approp. Current Page State/Agency/Installation/Project Request Request Mission No. Alaska Tricare Management Activity Fort Wainwright Hospital Replacement (Phase II) 0 44,000 C 8 California Tricare Management Activity Camp Pendleton MC Base FHOTC Support Facilities 2,900 2,900 C 12 Medical/Dental Clinic Repl (Horno) 3,950 3,950 C 15 Medical/Dental Clinic Repl (Las Flores) 3,550 3,550 C 18 Medical/Dental Clinic Repl (Las Pulgas) 3,750 3,750 C 21 Edwards Air Force Base Medical Clinic Addn/Dental Clinic Alt 17,900 17,900 C 24 Florida Tricare Management Activity Eglin Air Force Base Hospital Addition/Alteration/LSU 37,600 37,600 C 28 Patrick Air Force Base Medical Clinic 2,700 2,700 C 32 Tyndall Air Force Base Medical Clinic Addition/Alteration 7,700 7,700 C 36 New York Tricare Management Activity Fort Drum Veterinary Treatment Facility 1,400 1,400 C 40 Total Inside the United States 81,450 125,450 Germany Tricare Management Activity Kitzingen Health/Dental Clinic Life Safety Upgrade 1,400 1,400 C 45 Wiesbaden Health/Dental Clinic Addition/Alteration 7,187 7,187 C 48 FY 2001 MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, DEFENSE-WIDE ($ in Thousands) New/ Authorization Approp. Current Page State/Agency/Installation/Project Request Request Mission No. Italy Tricare Management Activity Naples Medical/Dental Facility Replacement 43,850 43,850 C 51 Total Outside the United States 52,437 52,437 Total 133,887 177,887 1. COMPONENT FY 2001 MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM 2.
    [Show full text]
  • AF Nonnuclear Munitions Safety Approval Process
    Air Armament Center War-Winning Capabilities…On Time, On Cost AF Nonnuclear Munitions Safety Approval Process An Overview This presentation is cleared for public release AF Nonnuclear Munitions Safety Approval Process • Who: Melvin Duval, Chief, AAC/SES • Where: AF System Safety Office, Air Armament Center • Experience: 20 + years in acquisition at Eglin, Chief Engineer several times, ~6 years in AAC/SES • What: Overview of what is needed for a successful Nonnuclear Munitions Safety Board (NNMSB) evaluation Background • System Safety begins at the inception of the program • Acquisition management authorities need to ensure system safety is an integral part of the acquisition strategy. (AFI 91-202, Chapter 9 and AFI 91-205) • The AAC System Safety Office (AAC/SES) is primary AF source of conventional munition safety expertise • Ensuring program design safety requirements • Assisting in defining contractual system safety requirements • Supporting the systems engineering processes • Evaluating and documenting design as required for NNMSB safety approval/ certification actions for all conventional munition systems Background • NNMSB Core Mission • Review Authority and System Safety Group for All USAF Conventional Munitions • Advisor to Acquisition Authorities on Design Safety and Qualification Issues • Approval Authority for Airborne Flight Testing of Uncertified, Live-Loaded Munitions and Associated Subsystems • Design Safety Certification Authority for all Air Force Conventional Munitions • AAC/SES, as NNMSB Executive Secretariat, assures
    [Show full text]
  • Photographs Written Historical and Descriptive
    EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, RANGE 22 ARMAMENT RESEARCH HABS FL-411-D SHOP HABS FL-411-D (Building 411) Range 22, east end adjacent to Eglin Boulevard Valparaiso vicinity Okaloosa County Florida PHOTOGRAPHS WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior 1849 C Street NW Washington, DC 20240-0001 HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, RANGE 22 ARMAMENT RESEARCH SHOP (Building 411) HABS No. FL-411-D Location: Range 22, east end adjacent to Eglin Boulevard, Eglin Air Force Base, Valparaiso vicinity, Okaloosa County, Florida. The building is located at latitude: 30.476767, longitude: -86.506094, which represents the center of the building. The coordinates were obtained in 2014 by plotting its location in Google Earth. Coordinates are based on WGS84. Eglin Air Force Base location has no restriction on its release to the public. Present Owner/ Occupant: United States Air Force, Eglin Air Force Base. Present Use: This building is currently unoccupied; however, the general area is used for testing. Significance: Building 411 was used primarily to support testing operations at Range 22. Range 22 was developed during the late 1930s as a gunnery range and it evolved in World War II to proof test the following: armament and armament- equipped aircraft; machine gun armament and incendiary bullets; gun turrets; periscope guns; and other military materiel. The gunnery tests were designed to gather information on guns and gun sight installations pertaining to accuracy, field of fire, reliability and durability, and base provisions. Each gunnery test consisted of a ground inspection and ground firing test, as well as an air firing test.
    [Show full text]
  • Major Commands
    Major Commands A major command is a subdivision of the Air Force assigned a major part of the Air Force mission and directly subordinate to Hq. USAF. In general, ■ 2010 USAF Almanac there are two types of major commands: functional and geographical. Headquarters Joint Base Langley, Va. Established June 1, 1992 Commander Gen. William M. Fraser III AirACC Combat Command Missions Major training exercises PErsonnEl operate USAF bombers (nuclear- Accurate Test; Amalgam Dart/Fab- (as of Sept. 30, 2009) capable bombers transferred to ric Series; Angel Thunder; Ardent Active duty 77,892 AFGSC Feb. 1, 2010); USAF’s CO- Sentry; Atlantic Strike; Austere Officers 11,226 NUS-based fighter, reconnaissance, Challenge; Blue Flag; Bright Star; Enlisted 66,666 battle management, and command Eager Tiger; Eagle Resolve; East- Reserve Components 58,127 and control aircraft and intelligence ern Falcon; Emerald Warrior; Falcon ANG 46,346 and surveillance systems Nest; Foal Eagle; Global Lightning; AFRC 11,781 organize, train, equip, and Global Thunder; Green Flag (East Civilian 10,371 maintain combat-ready forces for and West); Initial Link; Integrated Ad- Total 146,390 rapid deployment and employment vance; Internal Look; Iron Falcon; Key to meet the challenges of peacetime Resolve; Jaded Thunder; National air sovereignty and wartime combat Level Exercise; New Horizons Series; EquipmenT requirements Northern Edge; Panamax; Red Flag; (Total active inventory as of Sept. 30, Provide combat airpower to Talisman Saber; Terminal Fury; Ulchi 2009) America’s warfighting
    [Show full text]
  • Profiles of Pentagon Spending by State Center
    PROFILES OF PENTAGON SPENDING BY STATE CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL POLICY BASED ON AVAILABLE DATA AS OF DECEMBER 2012 Contact: William D. Hartung Email: whartung@ciponline.org Tel.: 917-923-3202 Note: These profiles were assembled by Natalie Peterson, Daniel Resnick, and William D. Hartung Profiles of Pentagon Spending by State December 2012 Alabama ......................................................................................... page 4 Alaska ............................................................................................ page 9 Arizona .......................................................................................... page 16 Arkansas ........................................................................................ page 22 California ....................................................................................... page 28 Colorado ....................................................................................... page 36 Connecticut ................................................................................... page 42 Delaware ....................................................................................... page 47 District of Columbia ...................................................................... page 52 Florida ........................................................................................... page 56 Georgia ......................................................................................... page 64 Hawaii ..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]