DOCSLIB.ORG

Supporting Joint Warfighter Readiness

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Supporting Joint Warfighter Readiness C O R P O R A T I O N TIMOTHY MARLER, MATTHEW W. LEWIS, MARK TOUKAN, RYAN HABERMAN, AJAY K. KOCHHAR, BRYCE DOWNING, GRAHAM ANDREWS, RICK EDEN Supporting Joint Warfighter Readiness Opportunities and Incentives for Interservice and Intraservice Coordination with Training- Simulator Acquisition and Use rr-a159-1_cover_6x9_v7.indd All Pages 7/19/21 5:13 PM For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RRA159-1. About RAND The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. To learn more about RAND, visit www.rand.org. Research Integrity Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © 2021 RAND Corporation is a registered trademark. Cover: Cover (left to right): U.S. Army; U.S. Air Force/Airman 1st Class Tiffany Price; U.S. Navy/ Petty Officer 2nd Class Joseph Millar; U.S. Navy/Mass Communication Specialist Apprentice Riley McDowell. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. About This Report This report documents research and analysis conducted as part of a project titled Supporting Joint Warfighter Readiness: An Analysis of Gaps Between Joint Training Needs and Training-Simulator Capabilities. The purposes of the project were to (1) investigate the gap between joint training needs that support readiness requirements across services and currently available and forthcoming technology in the training- simulator field and (2) recommend potential incentive structures for fostering cross-service collaboration for simulator acquisition and use. The research reported here was completed in January 2021 and underwent security review with the sponsor and the Defense Office of Prepublication and Security Review before public release. RAND National Security Research Division This research was sponsored by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and conducted within the Forces and Resources Policy Center of the RAND National Security Research Division (NSRD), which operates the National Defense Research Institute (NDRI), a federally funded research and development center sponsored by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, the Unified Combatant Commands, the Navy, the Marine Corps, the defense agencies, and the defense intelligence enterprise. For more information on the RAND Forces and Resources Policy Center, see www.rand.org/nsrd/frp or contact the director (contact information is provided on the webpage). iii Contents About This Report ............................................................... iii Figures and Tables ............................................................... ix Summary .........................................................................xiii Acknowledgments ............................................................ xxiii Abbreviations ................................................................... xxv CHAPTER ONE Introduction ....................................................................... 1 Problem and Motivation .......................................................... 1 Background ......................................................................... 3 Objectives ........................................................................... 5 Scope ................................................................................. 5 Study Approach .................................................................... 6 Outline of This Report ............................................................ 9 PART I The Services: Organizational Structures, Requirements Processes, and Acquisition Processes ...................................11 CHAPTER TWO Coordination Within Services: Organizational Structures .............13 Approach ...........................................................................14 Results ..............................................................................15 Conclusion ........................................................................ 28 v vi Supporting Joint Warfighter Readiness CHAPTER THREE Requirements Processes ........................................................31 Approach ...........................................................................31 Results ..............................................................................32 Conclusion .........................................................................37 CHAPTER FOUR Acquisition Processes ...........................................................39 Approach ...........................................................................39 Results: Mapping the Acquisition Process .....................................39 Results: Case Studies Illustrating Why Interservice Differences Are a Problem ..................................................................... 42 Conclusion .........................................................................47 PART II Joint Operations: Training Needs, Coordination, and Incentives .....51 CHAPTER FIVE Joint Training Needs ............................................................53 Training Tiers .................................................................... 54 Training Process ...................................................................55 Approach ...........................................................................55 Results ............................................................................. 56 Conclusion .........................................................................62 CHAPTER SIX Coordination Between Services ...............................................65 Potential Coordinating Organizations ........................................ 66 Timeline of Organizations and Policy ..........................................74 Conclusion .........................................................................76 CHAPTER SEVEN Incentives to Develop Interoperable Simulation-Based Training ......79 Collaboration Between the Services: The Services Lack Sufficient Incentives to Collaborate on Simulation-Based Training ............. 80 Contents vii Collaboration Between DoD and Industry: DoD Lacks Sufficient Incentives to Overcome Industry Disincentives to Develop Interoperable Simulation-Based Training ................................ 84 Conclusion ........................................................................ 88 PART III The State of the Art ..............................................................91 CHAPTER EIGHT Current Capabilities Supporting Networking Simulators and Interoperability .............................................................93 Interoperability ................................................................... 94 Data Standards .................................................................. 113 Virtual Gaming ................................................................. 116 Security Considerations ........................................................ 126 Conclusion ....................................................................... 130 PART IV Conclusion ...................................................................... 135 CHAPTER NINE Summary, Primary Themes, and Actions for DoD Stakeholders .... 137 Summary ......................................................................... 137 Primary Findings ................................................................ 138 Recommendations .............................................................. 139 Future Work ..................................................................... 154 APPENDIXES A. Organizational Charts for the Services and the Joint Staff ........ 157 B. Documents Reviewed to Map Requirements Processes for Each Service ............................................................... 165 C. Acquisition Process and Stakeholders for the Services ............. 169 D. Training Process
Load more

Recommended publications
  • VT-9 Trained Aviators First F-35C Pilots to Graduate from TOPGUN
    Volume 58, Number 13 https://www.cnic.navy.mil/meridian ~ www.facebook.com/NASMeridian ~ Twitter: @nasmeridianms June 25, 2020 VT-9 trained aviators first F-35C pilots to graduate from TOPGUN By Gidget Fuentes ing them the tactics, techniques and USNI News procedures that are required for them to successfully employ their aircraft, inte- Two F-35C pilots are the first naval grated into a larger force,” Cmdr. Timo- aviators to graduate from the TOPGUN thy Myers, TOPGUN department head, course flying the fifth-generation Joint said in the release. “We are also in the Strike Fighter, the Navy announced. business of teaching our graduates how Marine Maj. Derek Heinz and Navy to instruct other students, so that when Lt. William Goodwin are among the lat- they go back to the fleet, they are able to est graduates of the Navy Strike Fighter instruct at a very high level.” Tactics Instructor course, run at Naval While TOPGUN had previously grad- Aviation Warfighting Development Cen- uated students who trained to F-35C tac- ter at Naval Air Station Fallon, Nev. tics and procedures, Heinz and Goodwin Heinz is a member of the “Rough Raid- are the first fleet pilots already flying the ers” of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) jet to graduate the course, which used a 125, and Goodwin is a member of the syllabus developed from the ground up “Argonauts” of VFA-147, both F-35C specifically for F-35C integrated opera- Lightning II squadrons based at NAS tions, the Navy said. NAWDC has gradu- Lemoore, Calif. ally incorporated F-35C tactics into the Both Heinz and Goodwin trained and training curriculum as the advanced jet earned their “Wings of Gold” at Naval continues to enter the fleet and replace Air Station Meridian through Training aging Navy and Marine Corps fighter air- Squadron 9 (VT-9).
    [Show full text]
  • Naval Air Station Fallon : Nevada
    Military Asset List 2016 U.S. Navy NAVAL AIR STATION FALLON : NEVADA Established in 1942, Naval Air Station (NAS) Fallon is located in the Lahontan Valley of west-central Nevada in the remnants of an ancient lake bed. Because of the arid climate, much of the local area around NAS Fallon is irrigated farmland. NAS Fallon was originally designed as a fallback airstrip to defend against a Japanese strike on the West Coast during World War II. Today it is the Navy’s premier tactical air warfare Above: The Van Voorhis Airfield at NAS Fallon is named after Lieutenant training center, Commander Bruce Avery Van Voorhis, Nevada's only native-born Medal of specializing in air-to-air and air-to-ground training. Fully 80% of all Honor recipient. munitions dropped from Navy aircraft in training land on the Fallon Left: Members of the ground crew at Range Training Complex (FRTC). NAS Fallon is also the Navy’s only NAS Fallon prepare F/A-18C Hornet strike fighters for the final phase of training of a air station capable of supporting an entire carrier air wing at one carrier air wing. (U.S. Navy photo) time. MISSION & VISION STATEMENT To provide the most realistic integrated NAS Fallon's total economic impact is $573 million. air warfare training support available to carrier air wings, tenant commands and individual units participating in training FAST FACTS events, including joint and multinational exercises, while remaining committed to » Location: Churchill County, NV (near Fallon) its assigned personnel. In support of these critical training and personnel » Land Area: 8,600 acres (+ 240,000 acres of FRTC/BLM) requirements, NAS Fallon continually upgrades and maintains the Fallon range » Special Use Airspace: 13,000 square miles complex, the airfield, aviation support facilities and base living/recreation » Sorties/Operations: 51,000 per year accommodations, ensuring deployed unit training and a local quality of life second » Military Personnel: 930 active duty to none.
    [Show full text]
  • 89 STAT. 546 PUBLIC LAW 94-107—OCT. 7, 1975 Public Law 94-107 94Th Congress an Act Uct
    89 STAT. 546 PUBLIC LAW 94-107—OCT. 7, 1975 Public Law 94-107 94th Congress An Act Uct. /, 1975^ rpQ authorize certain construction at military installations, and for other purposes. [S. 1247] Be it enacted hy the Senate and House of Representatives of the Military United States of America in Congress assenibled^ construction and guard and reserve TITLE I—ARMY forces facilities authorization acts, 1976. SEC. 101. The Secretary of the Army may establish or develop mili­ Military tary installations and facilities by acquiring, constructing, converting, Construction rehabilitating, or installing permanent or temporary public works, Authorization including land acquisition, site preparation, appurtenances, utilities, Act, 1976. and equipment for the following acquisition and construction: INSIDE THE UNITED STATES UNITED STATES ARMY FORCES COMMAND Defense Support Activity (Fargo Building), Boston, Massachu­ setts, $8,000,000. Fort Bragg, North Carolina. $13,214,000. Fort Campbell, Kentucky, $13,680,000. Fort Carson, Colorado, $10,732,000. Fort Hood, Texas, $46,281,000. Fort Sam Houston, Texas, $870,000. Fort Lewis, Washington, $31,861,000. Fort George G. Meade, Maryland, $2,892,000. Fort Ord, California, $32,209,000. Fort Polk, Louisiana, $54,361,000. Fort Richardson, Alaska, $1,685,000. Fort Riley, Kansas, $14,879,000. Fort Stewart/Hunter Army Airfield, Georgia, $39,480,000. UNITED STATES ARMY TRAINING AND DOCTRINE COMMAND Fort Benning, Georgia, $44,212,000. Fort Eustis, Virginia, $633,000. Fort Gordon, Georgia, $6,945,000. Fort Jackson, South Carolina, $14,546,000. Fort Knox, Kentucky, $42,898,000. Fort Lee, Virginia, $719,000. Fort McClellan, Alabama, $41,090,000.
    [Show full text]
  • Twenty-Ninth Update of the Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket
    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 03/03/2016 and available online at http://federalregister.gov/a/2016-04692, and on FDsys.gov 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL- 9943-17-OLEM] Twenty-Ninth Update of the Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Since 1988, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has maintained a Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket (“Docket”) under Section 120(c) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). Section 120(c) requires EPA to establish a Docket that contains certain information reported to EPA by Federal facilities that manage hazardous waste or from which a reportable quantity of hazardous substances has been released. As explained further below, the Docket is used to identify Federal facilities that should be evaluated to determine if they pose a threat to public health or welfare and the environment and to provide a mechanism to make this information available to the public. This notice includes the complete list of Federal facilities on the Docket and also identifies Federal facilities reported to EPA since the last update of the Docket on August17, 2015. In addition to the list of additions to the Docket, this notice includes a section with revisions of the previous Docket list. Thus, the revisions in this update include 7 additions, 22 corrections, and 42 deletions to the Docket since the previous update. At the time of publication of this notice, the new total number of Federal facilities listed on the Docket is 2,326.
    [Show full text]
  • Fallon Range Training Complex Modernization Final Environmental
    7.0 List of Preparers Fallon Range Training Complex Modernization Final Environmental Impact Statement January 2020 Environmental Impact Statement Fallon Range Training Complex Modernization TABLE OF CONTENTS 7 LIST OF PREPARERS ................................................................................................................... 7-1 7.1 GOVERNMENT PREPARERS ............................................................................................................7-1 7.2 CONTRACTOR PREPARERS .............................................................................................................7-4 List of Figures There are no figures in this chapter. List of Tables There are no tables in this chapter. i Table of Contents Fallon Range Training Complex Modernization Final Environmental Impact Statement January 2020 This page intentionally left blank. ii Table of Contents Fallon Range Training Complex Modernization Final Environmental Impact Statement January 2020 7 List of Preparers 7.1 Government Preparers CDR Michael Albrecht, Operations Officer Naval Aviation Warfighting Development Center N3 Nathan Arcoraci, Environmental Planner Naval Air Station Fallon Mike Baskerville, Archaeologist Naval Air Station Fallon Gene Beale, Real Estate Naval Air Station Fallon Alex Bethke, Cultural Resources Program Lead Naval Facilities Engineering Command Southwest Commander Scott Beyer, Public Works Officer Naval Air Station Fallon Steve Bonaker, Environmental Engineer Naval Air Station Fallon Geoff Buckner, Geologist Naval Facilities
    [Show full text]
  • The F–35 Joint Strike Fighter Lightning Ii Program
    i [H.A.S.C. No. 115–79] THE F–35 JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER LIGHTNING II PROGRAM HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON TACTICAL AIR AND LAND FORCES OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION HEARING HELD MARCH 7, 2018 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 29–417 WASHINGTON : 2019 SUBCOMMITTEE ON TACTICAL AIR AND LAND FORCES MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio, Chairman FRANK A. LOBIONDO, New Jersey NIKI TSONGAS, Massachusetts PAUL COOK, California, Vice Chair JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island SAM GRAVES, Missouri JIM COOPER, Tennessee MARTHA MCSALLY, Arizona MARC A. VEASEY, Texas STEPHEN KNIGHT, California RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona TRENT KELLY, Mississippi JACKY ROSEN, Nevada MATT GAETZ, Florida SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California DON BACON, Nebraska ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland JIM BANKS, Indiana TOM O’HALLERAN, Arizona WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina THOMAS R. SUOZZI, New York ROB BISHOP, Utah JIMMY PANETTA, California ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia MO BROOKS, Alabama JOHN SULLIVAN, Professional Staff Member DOUG BUSH, Professional Staff Member NEVE SCHADLER, Clerk (II) C O N T E N T S Page STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS Tsongas, Hon. Niki, a Representative from Massachusetts, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces ................................................ 3 Turner, Hon. Michael R., a Representative from Ohio, Chairman, Subcommit- tee on Tactical Air and Land Forces .................................................................. 1 WITNESSES Conn, RADM Scott D., USN, Director, Air Warfare (OPNAV N98), Office of the Chief of Naval Operations ........................................................................ 11 Harris, Lt Gen Jerry D., USAF, Deputy Chief of Staff for Plans, Programs, and Requirements, Headquarters U.S. Air Force .............................................. 12 Rudder, LtGen Steven R., USMC, Deputy Commandant for Aviation, Head- quarters U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 81, No. 42/Thursday, March 3, 2016
    11212 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2016 / Notices TABLE 2—CONCENTRATION LIMITS OF CHEMICAL CONTAMINANTS THAT ARE HAZARDOUS AT LESS THAN 0.001 Mg/L— Continued Concentration Concentration Health based limit at the reduction Chemical constituent Waste code limit wellhead factor (mg/L) (mg/L) ) (Note 2) (C/C0 2-Methylpyridine ............................................. U191 ............................................................... 2.0 × 10¥3 1,000 2.0 × 10¥6 3-Methylpyridine ............................................. Note 2 ............................................................. 1.0 × 10¥6 1,000 1.0 × 10¥9 Nickel .............................................................. F006 ............................................................... 0.001 100 1.0 × 10¥5 Nicotinonitrile .................................................. Note 2 ............................................................. 6.0 × 10¥6 6,000 1.0 × 10¥9 Nitrilotiracetonitrile .......................................... Note 2 ............................................................. 1.0 × 10¥6 1,000 1.0 × 10¥9 Nitrobenzene .................................................. U169 ............................................................... 1.8 × 10¥2 100 1.8 × 10¥4 Oleic acid ........................................................ Note 2 ............................................................. 1.0 × 10¥6 1,000 1.0 × 10¥9 Oleoylsarconsinate ......................................... Note 2 ............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 97 STAT. 757 Public Law 98-115 98Th Congress an Act
    PUBLIC LAW 98-115—OCT. 11, 1983 97 STAT. 757 Public Law 98-115 98th Congress An Act To authorize certain construction at military installations for fiscal year 1984, and for Oct. 11, 1983 other purposes. [H.R. 2972] Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That this Act may Military be cited as the "Military Construction Authorization Act, 1984'\ Au'thorizSn Act, 1984. TITLE I—ARMY AUTHORIZED ARMY CONSTRUCTION AND LAND ACQUISITION PROJECTS SEC. 101. The Secretary of the Army may acquire real property and may carry out military construction projects in the amounts shown for each of the following installations and locations: INSIDE THE UNITED STATES UNITED STATES ARMY FORCES COMMAND Fort Bragg, North Carolina, $31,100,000. Fort Campbell, Kentucky, $15,300,000. Fort Carson, Colorado, $17,760,000. Fort Devens, Massachusetts, $3,000,000. Fort Douglas, Utah, $910,000. Fort Drum, New York, $1,500,000. Fort Hood, Texas, $76,050,000. Fort Hunter Liggett, California, $1,000,000. Fort Irwin, California, $34,850,000. Fort Lewis, Washington, $35,310,000. Fort Meade, Maryland, $5,150,000. Fort Ord, California, $6,150,000. Fort Polk, Louisiana, $16,180,000. Fort Richardson, Alaska, $940,000. Fort Riley, Kansas, $76,600,000. Fort Stewart, Georgia, $29,720,000. Presidio of Monterey, California, $1,300,000. UNITED STATES ARMY WESTERN COMMAND Schofield Barracks, Hawaii, $31,900,000. UNITED STATES ARMY TRAINING AND DOCTRINE COMMAND Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania, $1,500,000. Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana, $5,900,000.
    [Show full text]
  • April 1,1995
    DCN 1043 AVIATION-TROOP SUPPORT COMMAND, MO APRIL 1,1995 TABLE OF CONTENTS TAB 1. ITINERARY 2. BASE SUMMARY SHEET 3. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE RECOMMENDATION 4. CATEGORY CHART 5. INSTALLATION REVIEW 6. STATE MAP - DOD INSTALLATIONS AND STATISTICAL DATA 7. STATE CLOSURE HISTORY LIST -1 sr 8. PRESSARTICLES 9. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION '. COMMISSION BASE VISIT \ AVIATION-TROOP COMMAND (ATCOM), MO Saturday, April 1,1995 SSIONERS ATTENDING: Alan J. Dixon Lee KIing STAFF ATTENDING: Ed Brown Mike Kennedy David Lyles I3lNuuw Friday. March 31 2:30PM MT Lee Kling and David Lyles depart Malmstrom AFB en route St. Louis, MO: MILAIR C-2 1. -\-. ' 6:30PM CT Lee Kling and David Lyles anive St. Louis, MO from Malmstrom. * Lee Kling and David Lyles drive to Lee Kling's residence for overnight. lO:09AM ET Ed Brown and Mike Kennedy depart DC National en route St. Louis, MO: TWA flight 123. 11:26AM CT Ed Brown and Mike Kennedy arrive St. Louis, MO airport fkom DC National. * Rental car (Kennedy): National Confirmation#: 1046585036 Days: April 1 Phone#: 1800-227-7368 11 :30AM CT Ed Brown and Mike Kennedy depart St. Louis airport by car to pick up Lee Kling and David Lyles at Lee Kling's residence. 12:30PM CT Ed Brown and Mike Kennedy pick up Lee Kling and David Lyles and depart en route ATCOM. 1 :00PM CT Alan J. Dixon departs personal residence en route ATCOM. 1:45PM CT Alan J. Dixon, Lee Kling, Ed Brown, Mike Kennedy and David Lyles arrive ATCOM. 2:00PM to ATCOM base visit. ) 5:OOPM 5:OOPM CT Alan J.
    [Show full text]
  • American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act), Public Law 111-5, Is an Unprecedented Effort to Revitalize the U.S
    AmericanAmerican RecoveryRecovery andand ReinvestmentReinvestment ActAct ofof 20092009 DepartmentDepartment ofof DefenseDefense ExpenditureExpenditure PlansPlans MarchMarch 20,20, 20092009 Executive Summary Background The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act), Public Law 111-5, is an unprecedented effort to revitalize the U.S. economy, create or save millions of jobs, and put a down payment on addressing long-neglected challenges so our country can thrive in the 21st century. With much at stake, the Act provides for unprecedented levels of transparency and accountability so that the public will be able to know how, when, and where tax dollars are being spent. Department of Defense (DoD) Implementation The Recovery Act includes approximately $7.4 billion in Defense-related appropriations, which accounts for less than 1 percent of the total $787 billion stimulus package signed on February 17, 2009, by President Obama. The Department intends to spend this funding with unprecedented full transparency and accountability. A website, www.Recovery.gov, is the main vehicle to provide every citizen with the ability to monitor the progress of the recovery. The DoD also has a website: http://www.defenselink.mil/recovery, which links to Recovery.gov. As stated on www.Recovery.gov, the purpose of the Recovery Act is to create and save jobs, jumpstart our economy, address unfunded facility requirements, and build the foundation for long-term economic growth. In order to fulfill these objectives, the DoD intends to spend its funds
    [Show full text]
  • Better to Give Than Throw Away Commissaries Pass 21M-Pound Mark in Donations to Local Food Banks by Deca Corporate Communications
    NEWS RELEASE Defense Commissary Agency Corporate Communications 1300 E Avenue, Fort Lee, VA 23801-1800 Tel: (804) 734-8000, Ext. 8-6105 DSN: 687-8000, Ext. 8-6105 FAX: (804) 734-8248 DSN: 687-8248 www.commissaries.com Release Number: 09-20 Date: January 23, 2020 Media Contact: Kevin L. Robinson, public affairs specialist Tel.: (804) 734-8000, Ext. 4-8773 E-mail: [email protected] Better to give than throw away Commissaries pass 21M-pound mark in donations to local food banks By DeCA Corporate Communications Note: Go to the DeCA website to view this news release online. FORT LEE, Va. – Military commissaries would rather fill a food bank than a landfill. That’s the mindset of the Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA) as it announces a new milestone in donations – 21 million pounds plus – to local food banks. DeCA reached this mark in donations over a five-year period; 5 million pounds of it coming in 2019 alone. The donated items are certified by food inspectors as being edible but unsellable, said Randy Eller, director of the agency’s logistics directorate. “Instead of edible food being discarded in trash bins, we’re using it to help feed the hungry,” Eller said. “I’m proud that we can connect with food banks to make that happen.” Although DeCA always had limited authority to request food bank approval to donate edible but unsaleable products, the agency’s formal food donation program emerged after the 2013 government shutdown. As the agency prepared to close its stateside commissaries on Oct. 2 of that year, they requested temporary approval from the Department of Defense (DOD) to donate edible food, especially perishables, to local food banks to avoid dumping it in the trash.
    [Show full text]
  • Naval Air Station Fallon Update
    18E Naval Air Station Fallon Update Rob Rule Community Plans and Liaison Officer Naval Air Station Fallon “Nevada’s Carrier in the Desert” Naval Air Station Fallon and Fallon Range Training Complex “Nevada’s Carrier in the Desert” 2 Naval Air Station Fallon • Aviation Integrated Training • Air Wing • Strike Fighter Advanced Readiness Program • Aviation Graduate Level Schools • Navy Fighter Weapons School (TOPGUN) • Naval Strike Warfare Center (Strike University) • Carrier Airborne Early Warning Weapons School • Rotary Wing Weapons School • Electronic Reconnaissance Weapons School • Joint Close Air Support School • Naval Special Warfare Tactical Mobility Course • Growler Weapons School • Tomahawk Land Attack Missile Cell • Special Warfare • Tactical Ground Mobility • Close Air Support • Sniper Sustainment “Nevada’s Carrier in the Desert” 3 Fallon Range Training Complex “Nevada’s Carrier in the Desert” 4 Fallon Summary ⚫ Home to the Naval Aviation Center of Excellence for tactical, pre-deployment combat training ⚫ Training 100% of carrier-based Naval Aviation Strike Warfare units ⚫ Training 100% of Naval Special Warfare TGM units ⚫ Not easily or affordably replicated anywhere else in the United States or Overseas ⚫ Critical contribution to the Department of Defense as a Joint National Training Capability certified site “Nevada’s Carrier in the Desert” Fallon Range Training Complex Modernization “Nevada’s Carrier in the Desert” 6 Weapons Technology Evolution ⚫ Cumulative advances in weapons technology in response to threat ⚫ Fallon Ranges
    [Show full text]