DOCSLIB.ORG

Improvements to Air Force Strategic Basing Decisions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Improvements to Air Force Strategic Basing Decisions Research Report Improvements to Air Force Strategic Basing Decisions Constantine Samaras, Rachel Costello, Paul DeLuca, Stephen J. Guerra, Kenneth Kuhn, Anu Narayanan, Michael Nixon, Stacie L. Pettyjohn, Nolan Sweeney, Joseph V. Vesely, Lane F. Burgette C O R P O R A T I O N For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR1297 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-0-8330-9205-2 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2016 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. 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.html. 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. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Preface The U.S. Air Force manages any proposed significant changes and additions regarding the location of weapon systems and personnel through its strategic basing process, and the Air Force has conducted more than 100 strategic basing decisions since 2009. Some notable recent examples of strategic basing decisions are the evaluations of which installations will host the F-35 and KC-46A major weapon systems. Air Force basing decisions are public, frequent, and occasionally contentious. Because these decisions affect force posture, local economies, and public trust, it is imperative that the decisionmaking process be objective and reproducible. The Air Force employs a three-step enterprise-wide process to ensure consistency when it makes basing decisions. In the first step, a set of criteria is developed to evaluate an installation’s suitability to support a basing decision. The basing decision criteria are developed by the applicable major command (MAJCOM), approved by the Headquarters Air Force (HAF) and the Secretary of the Air Force (SecAF), and briefed to Congress. In the second step, individual basing scores for the defined criteria are assembled by the MAJCOM, and a small set of candidate bases, usually four to six, is selected for site surveys. In the final step, a preferred base is selected. The results of each step are approved by HAF and SecAF and briefed to Congress. The credibility of this process is dependent on these data calls resulting in high-quality data that are then analyzed in a transparent and objective manner. This report is an independent analysis of the Air Force’s basing process and the quality of the underlying data. It seeks to inform decisionmakers on potential improvements to the data and assessment criteria used in making basing decisions. It seeks to address three questions: 1. Are basing decision criteria aligned with Air Force intentions? 2. Are the data used in the Air Force’s strategic basing decisionmaking process authoritative, consistent, and auditable? 3. Is there potential for broader Air Force strategic or portfolio-wide inputs to strengthen the basing decisionmaking process? In answering the first question, we examined the actual data source for each base in enterprise-wide KC-46 and F-35 basing decisions. To assess the second question, we examined the desired and actual impact of each decision criterion for the past 25 basing actions. In addressing the potential for inclusion of strategic inputs, we assessed the historical impact of strategic inputs and possible mathematical techniques to incorporate such inputs into the current basing process. The research reported here was sponsored by the U.S. Air Force and conducted within the Resource Management Program of RAND Project AIR FORCE. iii RAND Project AIR FORCE RAND Project AIR FORCE (PAF), a division of the RAND Corporation, is the U.S. Air Force’s federally funded research and development center for studies and analyses. PAF provides the Air Force with independent analyses of policy alternatives affecting the development, employment, combat readiness, and support of current and future air, space, and cyber forces. Research is conducted in four programs: Force Modernization and Employment; Manpower, Personnel, and Training; Resource Management; and Strategy and Doctrine. The research reported here was prepared under contract FA7014-06-C-0001. Additional Information about PAF is available on our website: http://www.rand.org/paf/ This report documents work originally shared with the U.S. Air Force in October 2014. The draft report, issued in February 2015, was reviewed by formal peer reviewers and U.S. Air Force subject matter experts. iv Contents Preface ............................................................................................................................................ iii Figures........................................................................................................................................... vii Tables ............................................................................................................................................. ix Summary ........................................................................................................................................ xi Acknowledgments ....................................................................................................................... xvii Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................... xix 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 The Current Basing Decisionmaking Process .......................................................................................... 1 The RAND Analysis ................................................................................................................................. 2 Organization of This Report ..................................................................................................................... 3 2. Current Air Force Strategic Basing Process and Governance .................................................... 5 Roles and Responsibilities ........................................................................................................................ 6 Basing Decision Thresholds ..................................................................................................................... 7 Setting the Basing Decision Criteria ........................................................................................................ 8 Selecting Preferred Alternatives ............................................................................................................... 9 3. Is the Air Force’s Basing Process Aligned with Its Objectives? .............................................. 13 Understanding the Basing Criteria ......................................................................................................... 13 Analyzing the Relative Influence of Basing Criteria .............................................................................. 15 4. Assessing Basing Data Quality ................................................................................................. 23 Methodology for Assessing Basing Data Quality .................................................................................. 23 Data Quality Metrics .............................................................................................................................. 24 Sources Identified for Data Call Responses ........................................................................................... 25 Data Quality Assessment Findings ......................................................................................................... 26 Recommendations to Improve the Auditability of Data Quality ............................................................ 27 5. Implementation Challenges and Potential Improvements ........................................................ 31 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 31 Challenges and Recommendations for the Collection of Basing Data ................................................... 31 Data Relevancy and Timeliness ......................................................................................................... 31 Auditability ......................................................................................................................................... 32 Data Management ............................................................................................................................... 33 Challenges
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Public Law 161 CHAPTER 368 Be It Enacted Hy the Senate and House of Representatives of the ^^"'^'/Or^ C ^ United States Of
    324 PUBLIC LAW 161-JULY 15, 1955 [69 STAT. Public Law 161 CHAPTER 368 July 15.1955 AN ACT THa R 68291 *• * To authorize certain construction at inilitai-y, naval, and Air F<n"ce installations, and for otlier purposes. Be it enacted hy the Senate and House of Representatives of the an^^"'^'/ord Air Forc^e conc^> United States of America in Congress assembled^ struction TITLE I ^'"^" SEC. 101. The Secretary of the Army is authorized to establish or develop military installations and facilities by the acquisition, con­ struction, conversion, rehabilitation, or installation of permanent or temporary public works in respect of the following projects, which include site preparation, appurtenances, and related utilities and equipment: CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES TECHNICAL SERVICES FACILITIES (Ordnance Corps) Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland: Troop housing, community facilities, utilities, and family housing, $1,736,000. Black Hills Ordnance Depot, South Dakota: Family housing, $1,428,000. Blue Grass Ordnance Depot, Kentucky: Operational and mainte­ nance facilities, $509,000. Erie Ordnance Depot, Ohio: Operational and maintenance facilities and utilities, $1,933,000. Frankford Arsenal, Pennsylvania: Utilities, $855,000. LOrdstown Ordnance Depot, Ohio: Operational and maintenance facilities, $875,000. Pueblo Ordnance Depot, (^olorado: Operational and maintenance facilities, $1,843,000. Ked River Arsenal, Texas: Operational and maintenance facilities, $140,000. Redstone Arsenal, Alabama: Research and development facilities and community facilities, $2,865,000. E(.>ck Island Arsenal, Illinois: Operational and maintenance facil­ ities, $347,000. Rossford Ordnance Depot, Ohio: Utilities, $400,000. Savanna Ordnance Depot, Illinois: Operational and maintenance facilities, $342,000. Seneca Ordnance Depot, New York: Community facilities, $129,000.
    [Show full text]
  • Issue 4 Insightinsight Issue 4
    ISSUE 4 INSIGHTINSIGHT ISSUE 4 INSIGHTMAGAZINE 1 INSIGHT In this issue… ISSUE 4 2018 From the 09 39 SQUADRON CADET VISIT Editor… EDITORIAL TEAM: 10 Sqn Ldr Keith Bissett MSc BSc RAF. [email protected] External Email: 11 RAFA VISIT 23 20 Use personal email addresses listed Tel: +44 (0)1522 728377 12 NO. 56 SQUADRON EXERCISE Editor: 14 HIGH FLYING SUPPORTERS RECOGNISED Sqn Ldr Keith Bissett [email protected] A DAY IN THE LIFE OF A XIII SQN 17 REAPER PILOT Deputy Editor: Flt Lt D.J Hopkinson 18 RAF100 BATON RELAY AT RAF [email protected] WADDINGTON Welcome to this issue Artwork: 20 RAF100 FLYPAST of Insight. S. Oliver 23 RAF WADDINGTON’S 100 STATIONS IN Advertising by: 100 HOURS Welcome to this issue of the Insight Jo Marchant magazine; my final as editor of the Tel: 01536 526674 magazine before I handover to RAF WADDINGTON FRIENDS AND 24 FAMILIES DAY 18 24 Sqn Ldr Craig LeDieu. It has been an enjoyable experience bringing Designed by: community news to the Station over Amanda Robinson 26 51 SQUADRON HISTORY UNVEILED AT the last 2 years. [email protected] RAF WYTON In this edition we have news from 56 Published by: AWARDS Sqn and their freedom parade, the 28 Station Awards dinner and updates Lance Publishing Ltd, 1st Floor, Tailby House, from the many RAF100 events that Bath Road, Kettering, NN16 8NL 30 RUGBY LEAGUES happened in June & July. Tel: 01536 512624 Fax: 01536 515481 www.lancepublishing.co.uk 32 THE BATTLE OF THE BARGES As always we strive to include as [email protected] many articles as we can from our THE ISTAR FORCE AT THE ROYAL Station community.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Air Force and Its Antecedents Published and Printed Unit Histories
    UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AND ITS ANTECEDENTS PUBLISHED AND PRINTED UNIT HISTORIES A BIBLIOGRAPHY EXPANDED & REVISED EDITION compiled by James T. Controvich January 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTERS User's Guide................................................................................................................................1 I. Named Commands .......................................................................................................................4 II. Numbered Air Forces ................................................................................................................ 20 III. Numbered Commands .............................................................................................................. 41 IV. Air Divisions ............................................................................................................................. 45 V. Wings ........................................................................................................................................ 49 VI. Groups ..................................................................................................................................... 69 VII. Squadrons..............................................................................................................................122 VIII. Aviation Engineers................................................................................................................ 179 IX. Womens Army Corps............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Military Heritage: a Review of Progress 1994-2004
    RECENT MILITARY HERITAGE: A REVIEW OF PROGRESS 1994-2004 A report for Research and Strategy Summary This short report outlines English Heritage’s work on recent military heritage, 1994-2004, focussing on: 1 Commissioned work 2 Internal projects/programmes 3 Advice and influence 4 Management and protection 5 Research agenda 6 European and wider contacts 7 Outreach Much of the commissioned work (s1, below) was undertaken in the period 1994-1999, prior to the creation of English Heritage’s Military and Naval Strategy Group (MNSG) in 1999, and a policy head for military and naval heritage in 2001. Much of what is described in s2-7 (below) was undertaken through the influence and activities of MNSG. A series of annexes provide further details of commissioned work, in-house surveys, publications, conferences and MNSG membership. Review, 1994-2004 1 Commissioned work (Annex 1) Much original research has been commissioned by English Heritage since 1994, largely through its Thematic Listing and Monuments Protection Programmes. This has created a fuller understanding of twentieth century defence heritage than existed previously. For some subjects it contributed to, clarified or expanded upon previous studies (eg. Anti-invasion defences); for others the research was entirely new (eg. Bombing decoys of WWII). Commissioned projects have included: archive-based studies of most major classes of WWII monuments; aerial photographic studies documenting which sites survive; a study of post-medieval fortifications resulting in a set of seven Monument Class Descriptions; studies of aviation and naval heritage, barracks, ordnance yards and a scoping study of drill halls; and characterisation studies of specific key sites (RAF Scampton and the Royal Dockyards at Devonport and Portsmouth).
    [Show full text]
  • Central Lincolnshire Policy S13 Evidence Report
    Central Lincolnshire Policy S13 Evidence Report June 2021 Contents 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 3 2. Policy Context .......................................................................................................................... 3 National Policy and Guidance ...................................................................................................... 3 Local Policy ................................................................................................................................. 5 3. Context and Evidence .............................................................................................................. 5 Climate Change Evidence 2021 .................................................................................................. 5 Central Lincolnshire Energy Study 2011 ...................................................................................... 8 Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) .............................................. 13 4. Issues and Options Consultation ............................................................................................ 15 5. Proposed Approach in Draft Local Plan ................................................................................. 15 Wind Turbines – identifying the opportunities ............................................................................ 16 Wind Turbines – defining the scales
    [Show full text]
  • Ad 2 - Egxw - 1 - 1
    UK MIL AIP WADDINGTON AD 2 - EGXW - 1 - 1 25 MAR 21 EGXW AD 2.1 - LOCATION INDICATOR AND NAME EGXW - WADDINGTON EGXW AD 2.2 - AERODROME GEOGRAPHICAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE DATA 1 ARP Co-ordinates and site at AD: 53 09 58·18N 000 31 25·82W Centred on mid-point of Rwy 02/20. 2 Direction and distance from City: 4nm South of Lincoln. 3 Elevation/Reference Temperature: 230ft/21° C. 4 Magnetic Variation / Annual Change: 0°19’W (DEC 19) / - 0°12’ E. 5 Geoid Undulation at AD Elev Position: ---- AD Administration: Royal Air Force Address: Waddington Lincoln LN5 9NB. 6 Telephone: Mil: 95771 7301 / 6532 (Ops). Civ: (01522) 727301 / 726532. Fax: Mil: 95771 6786 (Ops). E-mail: [email protected] [email protected] Web site: www.raf.mod.uk/rafwaddington/ 7 Types of Traffic Permitted (IFR/VFR): IFR/VFR 8 Remarks: Nil EGXW AD 2.3 - OPERATIONAL HOURS AD: 0800 - 1800 Mon - Fri. Operating hours may vary due to operational demand. 1 Operations outside of normal published hours by request and subject to resource constraints. Customs and Immigration: H24. Provided by UK Border Force Immingham - 48 Hours notice required 2 through PPR. 3 Health and Sanitation: H24. 4 AIS Briefing Office: H24. 5 ATS Reporting Office (ARO): HO. 6 MET Briefing Office: H24. 7 ATS: HO. 8 Fuelling: Self refuelling only (Gravity/Pressure). Handling: VAHS operating hours Mon-Thu 0800-1700L, Fri 0800-1500L. Outside of these 9 hours Visiting Air Systems may be handled by Duty Sqn personnel. 10 Security: H24. 11 De-Icing: H24.
    [Show full text]
  • A Better Defence Estate November 2016 Amended Version: December 2016 Front Cover: a II (Army Cooperation) Squadron Typhoon in Front of the Squadron’S New HQ
    A Better Defence Estate November 2016 Amended version: December 2016 Front Cover: A II (Army Cooperation) Squadron Typhoon in front of the squadron’s new HQ. RAF Lossiemouth © Crown copyright 2016 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London T W9 4DU, or email: [email protected] Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Contents Preface by the Secretary of State for Defence and Chief of the Defence Staff .......................... 5 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 6 Part A - Our Strategic Approach ................................................................................................................. 9 Part B – A Better Defence Estate Strategy ............................................................................................12 a. Royal Navy........................................................................................................................................14 b. Army ...................................................................................................................................................17 c. Royal Air Force ................................................................................................................................28
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 the Magazine
    SCANDINAVIAN AVIATION MAGAZINE NO the MAGAzINE 03 2017 18th Aggressor Squadron - the blue foxes Eielson Air Force base in Alaska is home to one of only two USAF Aggressor Squadrons, the 18th Aggressor Squadron – also known as The Blue Foxes. BALTOPS & SABER STRIKE The Red Devils Tornado Dawn Strike 2017 Between May 28 and June 24, The 6° Stormo“Diavoli Rossi”, “Dawn Strike 17” was the final the exercises Baltops and Saber also know as the Red Devils, exercise in a six month long Royal Strike were taking place above are the last wing to fly the Australian Air Force “Air Warfare the Baltic Region. Tornado in the Italian Air Force. Instructor Course 2017”. SCANDINAVIAN AVIATION MAGAZINE This magazine features a look into the major exercises Baltops and Saber Strike, which has taking place in the Baltic Region, as well as a close look to one of the USAF aggressor units, the 18th Aggressor Squadron. We hope you like the magazine - enjoy! THE MAGAzINE The Red Devils Tornado 04 The 6° Stormo“Diavoli Rossi”, also know as the Red Devils, are the last wing to fly the Tornado in the Italian Air Force. Andrea Avian gives us a closer look at the the Red Devils. Exercise Dawn Strike 2017 18 Exercise “Dawn Strike 2017” was the final exercise in a six month long Royal Australian Air Force “Air Warfare Instructor Course 2017”. Jeroen Oude Wolbers reports from Australia. BALTOPS & SABER STRIKE 2017 24 Between the 28th of May and the 24th of June, the exercises Baltops and Saber Strike were taking place above the Baltic Region.
    [Show full text]
  • RAF Football Association - E-Bulletin
    RAF Football Association - E-Bulletin RAF FA CUP ‘THE KEITH CHRISTIE TROPHY’ AND RAF FA PLATE 19/20 UPDATE With the RAF Cup now in full swing, the second round produced some more exciting ties and saw some big names exit the competition. RAF Leeming’s away trip to Akrotiri was the eagerly anticipated tie of the round, however it proved to be a tough trip for the visitors as they were on the receiving end of a heavy 5-1 defeat. SAC Liam Thornton grabbed four of the goals, taking his overall tally to six and making him the current top scorer in the competition. RAF Brize Norton faced the long journey up to Lossiemouth and it proved to be successful as they ground out a 1-0 win with Sgt Dave Wanless scoring the all-important goal, Brize Norton will be hoping for a slightly shorter journey if they are drawn away in the next round. SAC Liam Wood scored his first two goals of the competition helping RAF Northolt to an away win at Wyton with RAF Coningsby also picking up a convincing away victory running out 4-0 winner against JFC Chicksands & RAF Henlow. RAF Honington who have a great history with the competition were knocked out at the hands of RAF Odiham thanks to a single goal from SAC Clarke Goulding. RAF FA E-Bulletin – RAF Cup Update Elsewhere, RAF Shawbury and RAF Marham both scored four goals each to take them through with victories over MOD St Athan and RAF Waddington respectively. RAF Boulmer also strolled through to the next round with an impressive 7-1 victory over RAF Cranwell.
    [Show full text]
  • Best Practices Study 2014
    Military Installation and Mission Support Best Practices (25 States / 20 Communities) Prepared for: Florida Defense Support Task Force (FDSTF) Submitted: December 23, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... iii BEST PRACTICES REPORT Purpose ................................................................................................................................ 1 States/ Communities ........................................................................................................... 1 Project Participants ............................................................................................................. 2 Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 2 Sources ................................................................................................................................ 3 Findings ............................................................................................................................... 4 STATES 1. Florida .............................................................................................................................. 18 2. Alabama ............................................................................................................................ 26 3. Alaska ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • SAMURAI GATE MAY 1, 2015 Heavy Drinking: Highway to Disaster Commentary by Paul Ahlberg and Capt
    New COLA Rate Survey begins May 1 The Living Pattern Survey, an important component to establish where and how goods and services By taking the time and effort to accurately complete in determining the Cost of Living Allowance for are purchased. All service members, or spouses the LPS, the DoD is able to set equitable allowance Japan, begins May 1 and continues through May 22. if they are the primary shoppers, in Okinawa are rates for Japan. For more information contact The Defense Travel Management Offi ce conducts highly encouraged to take the 30-minute survey the 18th Comptroller Squadron fi nance customer this online survey every three years and captures either at work or home, located at http://www. service at 18cpts.fi [email protected]. input from all service members and their families defensetravel.dod.mil/site/lps-japan.cfm. Joint Humanitarian Assistance Survey Team deploys to Nepal from Kadena By Airman 1st Class Members of a U.S. Pacifi c Command Joint Humanitarian Assistance Zackary A. Henry Survey Team load onto a U.S. Marine Corps C-130 at Kadena 18th Wing Public Affairs Air Base, on April 29. The team is deploying to Nepal to assist 4/29/2015 — U.S. Pacifi c Command de- earthquake relief efforts. Kadena’s Airmen worked through the night to load the team’s 20-plus members and gear for the departure. ployed a Joint Humanitarian Assistance Survey Team to Nepal from Kadena Air Base early April 29 in an eff ort to assist earthquake relief eff orts. Kadena’s Airmen worked through the night to load the team’s 20-plus members and gear into a U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • NSIAD-95-139 Military Bases B-261073
    United States General Accounting Office Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee GAO on National Security, International Affairs, and Criminal Justice, Committee on Governmental Reform and Oversight, House of Representatives August 1995 MILITARY BASES Case Studies on Selected Bases Closed in 1988 and 1991 GAO/NSIAD-95-139 United States General Accounting Office GAO Washington, D.C. 20548 National Security and International Affairs Division B-261073 August 15, 1995 The Honorable William H. Zeliff, Jr. Chairman, Subcommittee on National Security, International Affairs, and Criminal Justice Committee on Governmental Reform and Oversight House of Representatives Dear Mr. Chairman: As part of an earlier review of 37 bases closed by the first two base realignment and closure rounds, we reported in late 1994 on expected revenues from land sales, resources requested from the federal government, and issues delaying reuse planning.1 As requested in your letter of March 21, 1995, we collected more recent information on reuse planning and implementation at the 37 bases. Specifically, we are providing updated summaries on the planned disposal and reuse of properties, successful conversions, problems that delay planning and implementation, and assistance provided to communities. We are also including a profile of each of the 37 installations in appendix III. Under current plans, over half of the land will be retained by the federal Results in Brief government because it (1) is contaminated with unexploded ordnance, (2) has been retained by decisions made by the base realignment and closure commissions or by legislation, or (3) is needed by federal agencies. Most of the remaining land will be requested by local reuse authorities under various public benefit transfer authorities or the new economic development conveyance authority.
    [Show full text]