new af civil engineer magazine, spring 2002 · 2016. 8. 26. · 4 spring 2002 interview during the...

AIR FORCE CIVIL ENGINEER 1

OneHORSETeamONE

OneHORSETeamONE

2 SPRING 2002

FR

OM

TH

E T

OP

Maj Gen Earnest O. Robbins II

Pho

to b

y K

eith

Fre

d

Evolving with the Aerospace Expeditionary ForceThe Aerospace Expeditionary Force (AEF) came with a promise of deployments that

would be predictable in both timing and duration. Air Force leaders are now trying topreserve that promise while accomplishing our current combination of crisis operationsand steady state commitments. While the war on terrorism has caused a wrinkle in theAEF schedule, the system was designed to meet changing world crises and will continueto work as planned.

Our current global war on terrorism has an unknown, unpredictable duration. Whatdoes that mean for civil engineers? Prior to 9-11, AF civil engineers supported steadystate deployed locations in support of Operations NORTHERN WATCH and SOUTHERN

WATCH. Since 9-11, AF civil engineer support to deployed locations has increased nearlytwofold, which will continue to tap our resources. Personnel in forward deployed areas(Pacific Air Forces and U.S. Air Forces in Europe) will be rotated within their normaltour lengths. Those deployed in support of NOBLE EAGLE and ENDURING FREEDOM may beextended beyond the normal period of 90 days, depending on availability of personnel.

This is because in some civil engineer functional areas requirements exceed theavailable AEF forces. Right now we have four career fields that are stressed: powerproduction, fire protection, explosive ordnance disposal and readiness. Some in thosefields are staying deployed longer because there are insufficient forces in the particularAEF libraries to support all requirements and maintain future rotations. I am committedto finding solutions to relieve the stress on those fields.

Since requirements across several career fields exceeded the available AEF forces theAir Force implemented Stop-Loss. This bought us time to develop a plan to better matchrequirements and available forces. The good news is that most civil engineer career fieldswill be released during the next Stop-Loss review.

For those in the stressed fields, help is on the way in the form of additional airmenwho normally don�t deploy but will now be placed in an AEF library. The Deputy Chief ofStaff for Air and Space Operations has recently revised posturing guidance for buildingadditional Unit Type Codes (UTCs). As in the case of most other career fields, all civilengineer funded military positions will now be postured in deployable UTCs with theappropriate deployment codes, making them available for AEF taskings.

We also continue to address manpower shortfalls in the stressed career fields. Anyincrease has to be supported by a manpower study, and the Air Force Manpower andInnovation Agency is on a fast-track to identify total requirements for those fields.Increases, however, won�t have an immediate impact on the current situation until we canget more accessions and get them properly trained.

Personnel shortages aren�t our only challenge. We�re also experiencing equipment andmaterial shortages at some locations. The Air Force Contract Augmentation Program(AFCAP) has proven to be an excellent support tool. AFCAP is providing timely support inthe form of equipment, supplies and materials for RED HORSE and PRIME BEEF teams.

Our most senior Air Force leaders are working the issues we face. The Chief of Staffhas commissioned several studies through a special project office known as the Office ofthe Special Assistant for Expeditionary Aerospace Force (EAF) Matters. The office has aone-year charter to review current EAF management practices and address the challengesof supporting long-term engagements. Part of this will involve recommendations foraligning Air Force resources to ensure the successful evolution of the EAF.

It may take some fine-tuning as we continue through the AEF rotations, but theconstruct is solid. In time, we will overcome the challenges faced by our deployed person-nel and our base civil engineers who must continue to operate and maintain our baseswith a smaller work force.


A Combat FixAir Force civil engineers transform abombed-out Taliban airfield forcoalition use.

Departments

4 Interview

16 Technology

22 Education & Training

26 CE World

28 CE People

35 Unit Spotlight

8

The Civil EngineerMaj Gen Earnest O. Robbins II

Air Force Civil Engineer • Spring 02 • Volume 10, Number 1

AFCESA CommanderCol Bruce R. Barthold

Air Force Civil Engineer is published quarterly as a funded newspaper by the Professional Communications staff at the Air Force Civil Engineer Support Agency, Tyndall AFB, FL. This publication serves the Office of The Civil

Engineer, HQ U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C. Readers may submit articles, photographs and art work. Suggestions and criticisms are welcomed. All photos are U.S. Air Force, unless otherwise noted. Contents of Air Force

Civil Engineer are not necessarily the official views of, or endorsed by, the U.S. Government, the Defense Department or the Department of the Air Force. Editorial office: Air Force Civil Engineer, AFCESA/PCT, 139 Barnes

Drive Suite 1, Tyndall AFB, FL, 32403-5319, Telephone (850) 283-6242, DSN 523-6242, FAX (850) 283-6499, and e-mail: [email protected]. All submissions will be edited to conform to standards set forth in Air Force

Instruction 35-301 and The Associated Press Stylebook. Air Force Civil Engineer is accessible on the Internet on AFCESA’s home page: https://www.afcesa.af.mil.

Chief, ProfessionalCommunications

Lois Walker

EditorLetha Cozart

Graphic Designer–Layout EditorJames Cline, Jr.

Please send story ideas, articles,photos, comments and suggestions to

[email protected]

�Ramping Up� an Air BaseRED HORSE completes a militaryconstruction-funded aircraft ramp projectin Southwest Asia.

10

Explosives Site Planning� A Team EffortCivil engineering and safety can workto each other�s benefit duringexplosives site planning.

12

On the cover �Members of the 823rd RED HORSESquadron level an area for constructionof a new aircraft parking ramp whiledeployed in support of OperationENDURING FREEDOM. For more on the 823rd�sramp project, see story page10.(Photo by SSgt Michael Gaddis)

Broken Parts =Hangar SpaceAn abandoned hangar and historiclandmark at Pope Air Force Base isreturned to its status as a productivecontributor to mission accomplishment.

14

10

8

14

12


4 SPRING 2002

InterviewDuring the early weeks of Operation EEEEENDURINGNDURINGNDURINGNDURINGNDURING F F F F FREEDOMREEDOMREEDOMREEDOMREEDOM, the lack of air bases close to Afghanistan required a

rapid civil engineer response to bring operators closer to the fight. In this interview with Air Force Civil Engineer magazine, weasked Brig Gen Patrick A. Burns, The Air Combat Command Civil Engineer, to discuss CE challenges and successes

in bedding down people and aircraft across Central and Southwest Asia.

Brig Gen Patrick A. Burns, ACC/CE & A-7

Supporting FreedomAFCE: Since there was no build up period with this

contingency, compared to the Gulf War and the Kosovoconflict, how prepared were civil engineers when the callcame for rapid work in places most had never beenbefore?

Brig Gen Burns: Fortunately, our AerospaceExpeditionary Force (AEF) construct had a portion ofcivil engineers and other expeditionary combat supportpre-identified and poised �in the bucket� for deployment.And the core contingency beddown tasks we train for areuniversal regardless of where we deploy; it�s primarilylocal conditions that make the tasks harder or easier.

Also, we�d recently beenable to take advantage ofgeospatial technology todo advance, remoteplanning to pin down sitechallenges before weactually deployed. So I�dsay we were as preparedas we logically could havebeen given the surprisingevents of Sept. 11 andwhat our country calledupon us to do in re-sponse.

AFCE: Did havingthe AEF construct inplace make this deploy-ment different fromprevious contingencies?

Brig Gen Burns:The AEF construct reallyhelped accelerate our

ability at command levels to identify, alert and work withthe units that were needed to respond to the contingency.The AEF Center did a superb job of juggling issues withthe commands to meet the force sizes needed and matchthe best available expeditionary combat support.

From my personal experience, it was a markeddifference from how we did Operations DESERT SHIELD

and DESERT STORM. Not that we got forces to the fightfaster, but the deploying units were ready to be calledupon, so the impact on people and families was not a�bolt out of the blue.�

The one capability I wish we had is airborne or air-droppable RED HORSE. There were several timeswhen we would have liked to have had a small team ofengineers and heavy equipment air-inserted into Afghani-

stan locations to make expedient repairs in order to landC-130s and C-17s. We were already studying the idea,but as a result of Sept. 11 we are now pursuing itaggressively.

AFCE: Is this idea based on Airborne EngineerAviation Battalions in World War II?

Brig Gen Burns: Exactly � this is not a new idea.It�s something that, in the past, we�ve had a requirementfor. Historically, the Army has had this capability, al-though it hasn�t been used a lot in the last decade.

The renewed interest stems from General [John P.]Jumper. When he was in Europe during the last contin-gency, they had a similar remote access requirement thatcould only be met with engineers inserted by air. WhenGeneral Jumper came to Air Combat Command (ACC),he asked us to look at developing a �jumping HORSE�capability. We�re seeing that exact type of requirementagain during this contingency at several locations intheater, especially in Afghanistan and particularly forbombed-out runways. We bombed useable runways thereto preclude the enemy�s use, then we needed to go backin for military and humanitarian missions and re-establishthe country�s logistics capability and air transport. To getin we had to go either over land or air insert. We did it,but it was harder than it would have been if we�d had theairborne engineer capability.

AFCE: Has this requirement generated a renewedinterest in rapid runway repair?

Brig Gen Burns: Yes, and in a dramatic way. If youlook back in our history we haven�t done any real rapidrunway repair since Vietnam because we�ve never had theenemy threatening us on our own air bases, except forthe Scud missiles during DESERT STORM. The capability todo rapid runway repair on captured forward air bases aswe occupy them is basically the same technology and thesame engineer requirement. We just need to be a littlelighter and leaner in how we do it � smaller, moretransportable equipment, a smaller crew, and a fasterresponse.

AFCE: How did Afghanistan�s location and geogra-phy affect beddown efforts?

Brig Gen Burns: Afghanistan wasn�t an area we hadstudied or had experience with geographically for potentialcontingency support. Since 1990, we had pretty muchfocused on Southwest Asia (SWA), then later on EasternEurope. Of course the tragic events of Sept. 11 changedthat, and our attention shifted to a new part of the world.

Interview


In SWA, we had been dealing with warm, flatdeserts, and had developed host nation bases withconsiderable contract support capability. Suddenly, inAfghanistan and the surrounding countries, we werefacing extremes in geography and climate with bothdeserts and mountain plateaus, hot, dry summers andbitterly cold winters with heavy snow. And the areas wereremote, with limited water and other necessities � truebare base conditions in every sense of the word that hadto be overcome.

AFCE: Has this contingency presented other typesof unique challenges?

Brig Gen Burns: The folks at U.S. Central Com-mand Air Forces (CENTAF), the ACC Crisis ActionTeam (CAT) and the AEF Center would probably tell youthey had as many �unique� challenges as they cared tohandle.

The earliest major challenge was the same one we�vefaced in every modern contingency � the �shooters�arriving before the engineers and the rest of expedition-ary support could get there. That�s hard to avoid, becausethe commander-in-chief wants true combat capability assoon as he can get it, and the airlift just isn�t there tosupport moving everything at once. We recognize thisshortfall as a service, but there just isn�t enough money tosolve it in the near term.

The second major challenge wasn�t really �unique,� itwas almost a re-enactment of something we faced inVietnam where local contracted �heavy construction�capability meant 20 laborers with shovels as their only�equipment.�

Probably the truly unique part of this contingency hasbeen the amount of unknown challenges � what �wedidn�t know that we didn�t know� as we responded asrapidly as we could. Everything we can do on better�intel prep of the airfields� for future contingencies viaGeoReach and other tools will really pay off.

AFCE: What have been the advantages of having aconsolidated ACC/CENTAF Rear CAT?

Brig Gen Burns: CENTAF has a relatively smallCE staff that deals mainly with contingency planning andsustainment of Operation SOUTHERN WATCH. In the earlydays after Sept. 11, the beddown tasks would have beenoverwhelming if CENTAF didn�t have immediate�reachback� support to respond to its needs.

ACC provided a key advantage in not only standingup the ACC CAT, but functional �backshops� like our CEContingency Response Center (CRC) and LG�s LogisticsReadiness Center. This ensured key �experts� wereimmediately available in areas from aircraft parking plansand chemical and biological protection, to petroleum, oiland lubricants storage and distribution to provide quick-turn response to whatever CENTAF needed.

So I�d say the predominant advantage of our CATand CRC operation was being able to lift a heavy plan-ning �burden� off our CENTAF counterparts so theycould have rapid, decision-quality information and focuson how to execute.

Also, we were able to execute in wartime as we�vepracticed in peacetime. The ACC/CE staff, through ourSWA Delivery Cell, already knew the issues, challengesand current construction status for all initial beddownlocations and was able to parlay that situational awarenessinto immediate, viable and relevant CENTAF support.Because the relationships were already in place, we wereable to seamlessly augment, and then expand, theCENTAF CE staff without skipping a beat.

AFCE: What were some of the biggest problemsCEs faced at deployed sites?

Brig Gen Burns: That�s pretty easy to answer. Ourengineers, as well as those of the other services, facedsome of the most austere �bare base� environments in the�-stans� we�ve ever encountered. Things like worn outairfield pavements, no utilities whatsoever, and nosources of equipment or supplies within hundreds ofmiles. When you couple that with the typical iron flowarriving before the combat support forces as I mentionedearlier, the first 30 days at those sites were challenging tosay the least.

For example, at one base we had almost 600 opera-tional forces on the ground sleeping in a hangar foralmost a month, with only one toilet that didn�t work andwhatever food and water they had brought with them.They were very happy when the first engineers and theirHarvest assets showed up. They were in a tent citywithin a few weeks, no longer distracted by discomfort-ing living conditions.

We also encountered runways that were falling apartafter only a few aircraft passes, as well as runways wewanted to use but couldn�t because we had cratered them

Maj Gen EarnestO. Robbins II, Brig

Gen Burns andMaj Tim Fuller

during a recent tripto Southwest Asia.

(Photos courtesyACC/CE)

6 SPRING 2002

earlier in the conflict. So we couldn�t just land C-17s tobring in heavy equipment to repair them.

My favorite was a location where we finallycontracted with a local contractor to bring in 50 gravelloads a day to prepare an area for our tent city, only tofind out he had only one truck, which had to be loadedand unloaded with hand shovels because the bed of thetruck did not dump.

AFCE: Was it difficult bedding down a diversityof U.S. and coalition aircraft, including unmannedsystems?

Brig Gen Burns: The combination of types ofaircraft was easily manageable with computerizedaircraft parking plan tools that both ACC and AirMobility Command (AMC) have developed. Theprimary beddown challenge was really one of real estateavailability � the old adage �location, location, location.�There just weren�t many easy choices for base locationsand few with enough ramp space for all the aircraftCENTAF needed to bed down. As a result, our engineersfound themselves laying AM-2 matting, carving out dirtparking spots and designing expedient apron additions tomeet early beddown needs.

Later on we brought in RED HORSE squadrons totake on large airfield projects, including one ramp thatis larger than any we did in Vietnam. The latter rampwas the size of 18 football fields. We used enoughconcrete and asphalt building that ramp to lay a side-walk all the way from Langley Air Force Base to thePentagon!

The other key part of the �location� challenge wasthe airfields we had bombed, as I mentioned earlier, thatwere mined from this and previous conflicts. Bringingthem back to a usable condition involved not only U.S.Air Force civil engineers, but those from other servicesand coalition partners as well. At several locations youcould find a Norwegian or Jordanian explosive ordnance

disposal team clearing mines, an Army squad clearingdebris, and RED HORSE working the actual crater.

Another aircraft beddown challenge was the lack ofengineer relationships outside our normal area of respon-sibility. For example, Air Force civil engineers fromGuam, Europe and the U.S. were dealing with Frenchand British engineers not in Europe but in Afghanistan,which was a whole new ballgame. Coalition forces wereacting outside the normal theater in which they�veengaged before. The Army solved this problem in theBalkans by coming up with a combined engineer organi-zation. For this contingency, we�re not as integrated yet.This is something we need to do better as we�re going towork more as a coalition force in the future around theworld.

AFCE: How are CEs on ACC bases adapting to thedemands of Operation NOBLE EAGLE, considering thecurrent large-scale deployment of CE expertise andequipment?

Brig Gen Burns: We set up a process at ACC earlyon to attempt to track deployment impacts at every baseby Air Force specialty code. Other commands probablydid the same. We have enough experience as an Air Forceto know that large-scale deployments aren�t totally�painless.� We thought the key was to identify where theimpacts and risks are and try to work options to mitigatethem.

For example, firefighters are a heavily tasked, low-manned career field. Early on we engaged the Guard andReserve to backfill deployed fire protection teams.Similarly, we had a great response from individualmobilization augmentees who were able to provide keyleadership and supervisory expertise at the bases, as wellas expand our ACC/CE CRC to a 24/7 operation.

For the CE squadrons themselves, our guidance wasto curtail large-scale work during the period they were�in the bucket� for AEF deployment, then surge the work

Brig Gen Burns signed this B-1 bomb on behalf of Air Forcecivil engineers during a recent trip to Southwest Asia.

Brig Gen Mike Collings, ACC/LG, and Brig Gen Burnsin a Blackhawk over Kuwait.


for the 8�10 months after their AEF taskings. We�re justnow getting the first units that deployed back to theirhome bases, so we�ll see if that strategy works.

AFCE: How is GeoReach being used duringENDURING FREEDOM? Are there additional capabilities youwould like to see GeoReach have for CE�s purposes?

Brig Gen Burns: GeoReach really proved its worthearly on. A couple days after Sept. 11, we were tasked toprovide GeoReach planners to the Pentagon and assistCheckmate in remote assessment of potential beddownlocations. The team we sent was able to do in 3�4 dayswhat had taken 3�4 weeks to assess for prior Bosnia andKosovo planning.

As CENTAF was given political options for beddingdown aircraft, we relied on GeoReach analysis to tell us ifthose political options could be turned into viable physicalbeddowns. The ability to quickly evaluate potentialpersonnel beddown and aircraft parking capacities andassociated force protection options made GeoReachCENTAF�s number one site viability planning tool.

I know of one specific case in which GeoReachanalysis saved us from setting out on a basing option thatmight otherwise have been attempted and later aborted,had we not had the benefit of pre-commitment analysis.Don�t get me wrong, there were other engineering andlogistics planning tools used, but the ability to fuse thedata and display it visually for commanders madeGeoReach a real asset.

What we need to do with GeoReach next is populateit to U.S. Air Forces in Europe and AMC, then integrateother databases that can provide a more complete picturefor beddown planning. We also need to think through asolution set for each of the theaters for the future so thatwe�re not reacting to what�s happened, but preplanningwhere we might be. With GeoReach �airfield intelli-gence� pre-positioned at, say, a 60�80 percent solution,we could pull that information up in 5 minutes ratherthan 3�5 days.

AFCE: What has been your personal philosophy inguiding your ACC/CE staff while they handle the dualchallenges of both this contingency and their normal CEbusiness?

Brig Gen Burns: My staff will tell you that I�ve triedto stimulate them every day to focus on the same threethings I�ve felt for years are really important for individu-als in an organization to understand for the long term.

The first is �Attitude��your attitude not only affectshow you feel about yourself, but it also influences thepeople you come in contact with. So I encourage every-one to do an attitude check twice a day � once whenyou start your workday with your coworkers, and asecond time when you head home to your family. We allcan be a lot more effective if we capture a positiveattitude to guide us and the people we touch in our dailylives.

The second is �Direction��by that I mean knowingwhere your boss and your organization is headed andhow you personally fit in. That takes frequent communi-cation so that your personal �course corrections� are inline with the corporate �vector� that your organization islaunched on. It also means have a direction for yourpersonal life and talk with your family to be sure you�reon course with them as well.

The third is �Teamwork��none of us got as far as wehave by ourselves! We are more successful because wewere able to accomplish as a team what no one individualcould do alone. The same holds true for what a familyholds important and pulls together to accomplish.

I appreciate this opportunity to discuss our civilengineers �supporting freedom.� I just returned from twoback-to-back 10-day trips to the ENDURING FREEDOM areaof operations. I can tell you that all the airmen I came incontact with knew why they were there and were su-perbly proud to serve! I had the rare privilege during onebase visit of signing a B-1 bomb � it was delivered thatvery night with the inscription: �Take This�From AllOur Deployed Civil Engineers!�

CENTAF re-establishes CE functionOn FOn FOn FOn FOn Feb. 15, 2002, U.S. Central Command Air Feb. 15, 2002, U.S. Central Command Air Feb. 15, 2002, U.S. Central Command Air Feb. 15, 2002, U.S. Central Command Air Feb. 15, 2002, U.S. Central Command Air Forces (CENTorces (CENTorces (CENTorces (CENTorces (CENTAF) stood up a civilAF) stood up a civilAF) stood up a civilAF) stood up a civilAF) stood up a civil

engineer (CE) staff function separate from the logistics (LG/A4) office. Col Tengineer (CE) staff function separate from the logistics (LG/A4) office. Col Tengineer (CE) staff function separate from the logistics (LG/A4) office. Col Tengineer (CE) staff function separate from the logistics (LG/A4) office. Col Tengineer (CE) staff function separate from the logistics (LG/A4) office. Col TomomomomomRRRRRyburyburyburyburyburn, chiefn, chiefn, chiefn, chiefn, chief, R, R, R, R, Readiness Division, Directorate of The Civil Engineereadiness Division, Directorate of The Civil Engineereadiness Division, Directorate of The Civil Engineereadiness Division, Directorate of The Civil Engineereadiness Division, Directorate of The Civil Engineer, Headquar, Headquar, Headquar, Headquar, Headquar ters Airters Airters Airters Airters AirCombat Command, Langley Air FCombat Command, Langley Air FCombat Command, Langley Air FCombat Command, Langley Air FCombat Command, Langley Air Force Base, Vorce Base, Vorce Base, Vorce Base, Vorce Base, VAAAAA, deployed to Prince Sultan Air Base in, deployed to Prince Sultan Air Base in, deployed to Prince Sultan Air Base in, deployed to Prince Sultan Air Base in, deployed to Prince Sultan Air Base inSouthwest Asia to stand up CENTSouthwest Asia to stand up CENTSouthwest Asia to stand up CENTSouthwest Asia to stand up CENTSouthwest Asia to stand up CENTAF FAF FAF FAF FAF Forororororward �ward �ward �ward �ward �A7 Installations,� dual-hatted as theA7 Installations,� dual-hatted as theA7 Installations,� dual-hatted as theA7 Installations,� dual-hatted as theA7 Installations,� dual-hatted as theCombined Forces Air Component Command A7.Combined Forces Air Component Command A7.Combined Forces Air Component Command A7.Combined Forces Air Component Command A7.Combined Forces Air Component Command A7.

According to Brig Gen BurAccording to Brig Gen BurAccording to Brig Gen BurAccording to Brig Gen BurAccording to Brig Gen Burns, this action was in response to the growingns, this action was in response to the growingns, this action was in response to the growingns, this action was in response to the growingns, this action was in response to the growinginstallation beddown challenges in the CENTinstallation beddown challenges in the CENTinstallation beddown challenges in the CENTinstallation beddown challenges in the CENTinstallation beddown challenges in the CENTAF area of responsibil ityAF area of responsibil ityAF area of responsibil ityAF area of responsibil ityAF area of responsibil ity, coupled with a, coupled with a, coupled with a, coupled with a, coupled with amassive increase in potential constrmassive increase in potential constrmassive increase in potential constrmassive increase in potential constrmassive increase in potential construction efforuction efforuction efforuction efforuction effor ts, and is a repeat of how CENTts, and is a repeat of how CENTts, and is a repeat of how CENTts, and is a repeat of how CENTts, and is a repeat of how CENTAFAFAFAFAFFFFFForororororward was organized in September 1990 when Col Karsten Rward was organized in September 1990 when Col Karsten Rward was organized in September 1990 when Col Karsten Rward was organized in September 1990 when Col Karsten Rward was organized in September 1990 when Col Karsten Rothenberg deployedothenberg deployedothenberg deployedothenberg deployedothenberg deployedas the CENTas the CENTas the CENTas the CENTas the CENTAF CE. The organization now mirAF CE. The organization now mirAF CE. The organization now mirAF CE. The organization now mirAF CE. The organization now mir rors how Fifrors how Fifrors how Fifrors how Fifrors how Fif th Air Fth Air Fth Air Fth Air Fth Air Force in Japan andorce in Japan andorce in Japan andorce in Japan andorce in Japan andSeventh Air Force in Korea are configured.Seventh Air Force in Korea are configured.Seventh Air Force in Korea are configured.Seventh Air Force in Korea are configured.Seventh Air Force in Korea are configured.

8 SPRING 2002

When U.S. and Northern Alliance forces securedthe area around Mazar-e-Sharif in late November, itsignaled a victory for Operation ENDURING FREEDOM.

The move into the city meant access to one of threemain airfields in Afghanistan. Despite securing Mazar-e-Sharif, the ability to begin flying operations out of theairfield would present its own challenges.

With massive bomb craters on the runway, aninoperable control tower, land mines and booby traps, thetask would have seemed unconquerable for many. But,Air Force combat controllers and RED HORSE engi-neers turned a battle-ridden airstrip into a forwardoperating platform in a matter of days.

According to MSgt Bart Decker, a senior combatcontroller at the site, he and his team of fellow controllersarrived in the city after moving up the Balkh Valley with theNorthern Alliance. Once the city was in Northern Alliancecontrol, they turned their attention to opening the airfield.

�Our first obstacle was the fact the Taliban had placedbooby traps all around the airfield,� said Sergeant Decker.�Explosive ordnance disposal teams swept the entire areafor munitions and booby traps. They spent days justblowing up all the unexploded ordnance and bombs left inand around the area. They also found apipe bomb inside the control tower,which they said was the biggest theyhad ever seen.�

Even with the pipe bomb re-moved, the tower was shattered andbattered.

�The glass was blown out of thetower and the inside was stripped ofevery piece of equipment,� saidSergeant Decker. �Even if we had allthe spare parts and building materialsreadily available to repair the tower, itwould have taken too long. We neededto get the system up and running tobring in U.S. forces immediately.�

The controller determined the safestroute was to establish tower operationsfrom a remote setup. Using vehicles and

portable radio systems, as well as portable lighting systems,the controller could conduct air traffic control duties.

Combat controllers are certified air traffic controllerswho specialize in unconventional missions. They areuniquely qualified to set up small radar and communica-tion sites anywhere in the world to guide aircraft forlanding on makeshift runways without the benefit of atower or large communications systems. Controllersprovide command and control, intelligence gathering,surveying capabilities, limited weather observations andare qualified in demolition to clear obstructions andhazards from potential runways and landing zones.

But before Sergeant Decker could begin vectoring inaircraft he had to have a place to land them. Since themain runway was pitted with massive craters, the combatcontroller examined an alternate site.

�It was an old Soviet dirt strip, but after we con-ducted initial survey and assessment on the soil wedetermined it was not strong enough to withstand theweight of heavier aircraft,� he said.

With the dirt strip below safety standards, SergeantDecker had to find a way to get the pitted runwayoperational.

�At the start of the air campaign, U.S.and coalition forces had conducted a heavy

Combat Controllers, RED HORSE joinforces to open Mazar-e-Sharif airfield

by T

Sgt G

inge

r Sch

reitm

uelle

rAF

SOC

Publ

ic A

ffai

rs

(Left) MSgt Ron Westerfield measures atypical spall in front of one of the craterson the runway during the team�s initialevaluation in November. (Above) MSgtDavid Cook (in crater) and MSgtWesterfield examine a typical runwaycrater. (Photos courtesy 823rd RHS)


bombing run on the airfield. The end of the runway hadmassive damage; about 4,000 feet was destroyed beyondrepair,� he said. �Fortunately, we still had more than7,000 feet of runway we could use. However, that 7,000feet included eight bomb craters that would need to berepaired.�

The call came in for the Airfield Pavements Evalua-tion Team from the Air Force Civil Engineer SupportAgency to evaluate the airfield and for the 823rd REDHORSE Squadron to assist in assessing the damage andthen complete the repairs.

Without concrete or asphalt readily available incountry, the controller wasn�t sure how the engineerswould make it happen.

�The coalition forces did a great job of denying theTaliban use of the airfield,� said MSgt Ron Westerfield,823rd RHS, Hurlburt Field, FL. �The runway was per-fectly bombed, with craters spread out across the airfield.�

The APE Team completed its initial evaluation of therunway Nov. 16, 2001, while the RED HORSE teamdid an initial assessment to determine how wide and deepeach crater was, as well as what material and how muchof it was needed.

According to Sergeant Westerfield, a 17-year REDHORSE veteran, repairing this runway was a Catch-22.

�With the runway damaged beyond use, there was noway to fly in the needed supplies to fix the runway.Additionally, the land bridge between Uzbekistan andAfghanistan was not open yet, so we could not bring it inby land,� he said. �The best material to repair the craterswould be asphalt, concrete and crushed stones.�

Turning to local sources for the material and equip-ment also posed a problem.

�Afghanistan has been involved in war and conflictfor years. The asphalt and concrete plants had long beendestroyed,� he said. �The stones were river-washedrocks, meaning they were rounded and, even whencrushed, would move around in the crater like marbles

under your feet � definitely not the material you want toland aircraft on.�

Sergeant Westerfield spent a few days mulling overpossibilities, then was approached by a local contractorwho said he could fix the craters with local supplies.

�I was a bit hesitant at first,� said the sergeant.�They had no heavy equipment and proposed doing allthe work using local materials. I was not sure it wouldwork, but we had to try something. (Sergeant Decker)needed 4,000 feet of usable runway to get the airflow in,and we were going to make it happen.�

The process, though primitive, worked.�It was amazing to watch,� said Sergeant

Westerfield. �They shoveled rocks into the back of smallpickup trucks and drove out to the craters. Then theyshoveled 2 inches of rock into a crater and pounded itdown with hand tools.�

In the meantime, 55-gallon drums of crude tar satatop fires alongside the runway. As the tar boiled, crewstook small pails and filled them with the boiled tar. Theycarried the mixture to the craters and poured it over thecrushed rocks. The process was repeated until the craterswere filled.

�When you think about the modern technology weuse, [watching] as they did this all by hand, it wasunbelievable. This process is more than 100 years old,and it worked,� said Sergeant Westerfield. �It was likefixing it with bubble gum and Skittles.�

The primitive process was a combat fix that wouldendure the weight of the aircraft � but not for long.

Continued on Page 11

Afghan workers clear debris near amassive crater on the runway atMazar-e-Sharif. Under thesupervision of RED HORSE, theworkers patched eight large craterson the runway.

The team was able to get a deployablepavement repair system on site inJanuary. Pictured is SrA CleofiesWhite using a front-end loader tobackfill the excavated crater.

10 SPRING 2002

Two hundred and twenty thousand tons of rock, 1.4million gallons of water and almost four months of laborhave gone into the 823rd Expeditionary RED HORSESquadron�s military construction (MILCON) fundedramp project at Al Udeid Air Base, Qatar, and the mainportion of it � the concrete laying � was complete atthe end of March.

The $9.1 million project marks the first time airmenhave been used to execute a major MILCON projectsince the Vietnam Era.

Equivalent in size to nearly 18 football fields, theramp is the largest concrete construction project in 823rdERH history and required more material than thesquadron has ever used on a single concrete job, accord-ing to Capt Heath Duncan, officer in charge of theproject.

It�s also RED HORSE�s first time using a slip-formpaver, a piece of machinery that allows the team to putconcrete down without having to use forms. The slip-form paver continuously extrudes concrete that is stifferthan conventional concrete and has a very low slumpratio. The machine also put in 69,000 tie bars that holdthe slabs together. Without it, the job would have re-quired twice as many people and taken 30 days longerthan the month and a half already spent on the concreteportion of the construction effort, Duncan said.

During April the squadron, from Hurlburt Field, FL,wrapped up other tasks associated with the project,including laying asphalt, painting stripes for the taxiwaysand installing thousands of feet of lighting. The ramp wasscheduled to open April 24 � a week ahead of schedule.

Once the concrete was in place, a few of the dozensof shift workers could go home � some after spendingmore than 150 days deployed. Among the first group toleave was SrA Tim Buckley, who, like most of the crew,had been deployed since late October.

This is Buckley�s seventh or so TDY since beingassigned to RED HORSE � they�ve been so busy he�slost track of the actual number. However, he said he�snever been a part of anything of this magnitude. He wasinvolved in building a mile and a half of fence at PrinceSultan Air Base, Saudi Arabia, in 2000, but said the rampproject is more satisfying because of the size and theoverall effect it will have.

�The Air Force mission is flying. We�ve built some-thing that will be a vital part of that mission for years and

by S

rA M

att D

oneg

an36

6th

AEW

Pub

lic A

ffai

rs an Air BaseRED HORSE builds MILCON project in Qatar

SSgt Chuck Risinger, 823rd RHS, operates a slip form paverMarch 24. SSgt Wayne Skocelas makes sure the surface of theconcrete has enough moisture to obtain the proper finish. Onthe ground, MSgt Bizzle Davis keeps steering sensors clearfrom debris. (Photos by SrA Danielle Upton)

SrA Justin Soule, 823rd RHS, finishes the edge of a new 1,240-footlong concrete lane March 24 at Al Udeid.


�Because of the type of rocks that were available, theprocess did not hold long,� said Sergeant Westerfield.�After about two days of takeoffs and landings, the craterswould begin to rut.�

That didn�t stop RED HORSE or the airflow.Sergeant Westerfield and his local runway repair team

years to come,� said Buckley. �There�s a lot of prideinvolved knowing the impact this will have in the war onterrorism.�

Long hours and minor setbacks, like machinefailures, were some of the hardships SSgt Eric Sexton andthe team faced during their time working on the ramp.Sexton summarized his feelings in a few words. �I�m gladto be wrapping it up,� he said.

A1C Garfield Turner graduated from technicaltraining in February 2001, then departed Hurlburt Fieldin October for his first deployment. He said he�s learneda lot here, including the intricacies of the saw-cutterposition he�s filling now.

�I�ve had a lot of stick time on the equipment,� hesaid.

Turner predicts he�ll be here until May when theramp is completed, but said it felt good to get theconcrete done.

The RED HORSE team has laid more than 1,000cubic yards of concrete per day since it began. There was

simply moved from crater to crater, filling and repairingthe holes to make a stretch of runway usable.

�They would fill in a crater and we would move allthe portable equipment to that area and open air traffic,�said Sergeant Decker. �In the meantime, the REDHORSE guys were fixing another section. When onearea started to rut, they moved to the next area.�

�It was not perfect; it was a Band-Aid on a badwound,� said the controller. �But, in the same breath, wekept the airflow coming in and ensured all the people andsupplies needed to sustain the force made it in to Mazar-e-Sharif.�

Making it all happen seemed improbable at the onset,but the controllers and RED HORSE did it in 10 days.With a makeshift tower and portable navigational andcommunication systems in place, Sergeant Deckerbrought the first plane into Mazar-e-Sharif.

Over the next few months, Sergeant Decker re-mained in Mazar-e-Sharif to support air traffic controloperations. He and his fellow controllers also began theprocess of fixing and repairing the control tower so itcould be turned over to host-nation controllers.

Meanwhile, Sergeant Westerfield and other horsemenfrom the 823rd shifted around the theater providing theircombat engineering expertise to other runways, basecamps and operating locations.

Editor’s note: On Jan. 14, 2002, the 823rd RHS was ableto get a deployable pavement repair system on site andperform more permanent repairs on the damaged runway,thus enabling a steady stream of C-17s to accomplishtheir mission in the area.

A Combat FixA Combat FixA Combat FixA Combat FixA Combat Fix Continued from Page 9

a time when 350 trucks a day full of rock cycled throughthe area and front gate so the team could build up theentire 20 acre area by 3.5 feet.

There are many tasks involved in successfully build-ing an aircraft ramp. From the guys who drive trucksback and forth from the two concrete batch plants (alsobuilt by RED HORSE), to the guys who smooth thefinished product, fill holes or put in dowels, the teamOIC said he thinks without a doubt that the REDHORSE ramp team includes some of the hardest work-ing people at Al Udeid.

�I don�t think anyone else even comes close,� saidDuncan. �Most of the guys on the crew are new andinexperienced. They�ve used new construction tech-niques, they�re ahead of schedule and they�ve done anawesome job. The job needed to be done quickly, so AirCombat Command and U.S. Central Command AirForces brought us in. The ramp looks great and it will beused to support operations for a long time.�

The team completes the second and final pour on oneof the craters and finishes the concrete. At center,above, is the Deployable Pavement Repair System(DPRS) with members refilling the material bins.

12 SPRING 2002

Guest Feature

One of the goals of our Air Force Explosives SafetyProgram is to use the process of explosives site planningto ensure the safety of our personnel, the public and AirForce assets and facilities. Why? Because failure to do socould result in the inability of commanders to performtheir missions.

Successful explosives site planning requires an activeteam effort between the weapons safety manager (WSM),wing civil engineering personnel and the user (e.g.munitions, logistics and others). I�d like to take thisopportunity to highlight some areas in which civilengineering and safety can work to each other�s benefit.

You may have noticed an increase in the number ofexplosives site plansbeing developed by yourWSM over the past year.In addition to developingsite plans to accommo-date new constructionand changes in missionrequirements, your WSMis also generating newsite plans for existingfacilities and missions.This is driven by twolooming Air Force-widedeadlines. The Depart-ment of DefenseExplosives Safety Board(DDESB), whichapproves all violation-freeexplosives site plans, hasmandated that the newrequirements for HazardClass Division 1.2.xexplosives be incorpo-

rated into existing site plans by the end of FY03. Inaddition, the Air Force has agreed to re-site all the old�baseline,� or grandfathered, site plans by the end ofFY05.

As you can imagine, we�re talking about a lot of siteplans being developed in the next several years � morethan 5,700, in fact. We usually generate only about 400 ayear Air Force-wide. In an attempt to help meet the siteplanning deadlines, we are in the process of implementingan automated explosives site planning software program atthe majority of our installations. This new software iscalled ASHS, the Assessment System for Hazard Surveys.

ASHS uses a digital map and facility database asinputs, performs the quantity-distance calculationsrequired based on the map and database information, and

generates an explosives site plan map and an AF Form943 (the site plan data form). These two outputs are thekey elements of an explosives site plan.

Alas, as with any software program, the old adageapplies � garbage in, garbage out. This is where youcome in. As we implement ASHS at your base we needyour assistance to ensure the map and database areaccurate. In fact, we need to have an accurate map anddatabase even for situations where we�re doing siteplanning the old-fashioned �stubby pencil� way. Imple-mentation of the GeoBase program will certainly help thesituation where GeoBase and ASHS implementation areoccurring simultaneously.

The safety community recognizes that there has beena revolution of sorts in the way the Air Force contractsfor new facility construction. The emphasis these days ison providing contractors with performance measure-ments versus detailed contractual design requirements;and, there�s always an incentive to get the money oncontract as early as possible � use it or lose it. Unfortu-nately, these two imperatives have the potential to causebig problems if your resident WSM is not brought intothe contracting process early enough.

A proactive WSM can help you ensure any designrequirements necessary for explosives safety (such aslightning protection systems and blast-resistant windows)are incorporated into the initial contract. It�s alwayscheaper to write the contract correctly the first time thanto modify it. Another concern with new construction isthe placement of the facility to ensure quantity-distanceseparations requirements are met. These requirementsapply not only to explosives storage or operating facilities,but to any facility placed inside an existing quantity-distance arc.

AFMAN 91-201, Explosives Safety Standards, allowsfor a two-stage explosives site planning process for newconstruction. A �preliminary� site plan can be submittedjust to ensure the proposed facility location will meetquantity-distance requirements. The �final� site plan canthen be submitted once the design has matured suffi-ciently to provide the necessary facility drawings to showcompliance with explosives safety requirements.

In case you�re not aware of the requirements,DDESB approval of the final site plan is required beforeconstruction can begin. However, Secretary of the AirForce approval is required for all new construction thatviolates quantity-distance requirements.

So work with your WSM to start the explosives siteplanning process early enough to avoid any delays in yourconstruction schedule. Now, here�s a footstomper � if youhave to make changes to the facility location or design,

Guest FeatureM

aj G

en T

imot

hy A

. Pep

peAi

r For

ce S

afet

y Ce

nter

Explosives Site Planning — A Team Effort

Maj Gen Timothy A. Peppe


make certain they�re coordinated withthe WSM.

A final word on construction � ifpossible, for explosives facilities use afacility design that has already beenapproved by the DDESB. This will notonly reduce the amount of paperworkrequired for the explosives site plan,but will also speed up the site planreview process. There is a list ofDDESB-approved designs in theirTechnical Paper 15, Approved Protec-tive Construction. You can get a copyof this paper through your local WSM.

One word of caution � deviat-ing from the DDESB-approveddesign will invalidate their approval.The impact may be limited tosubmitting the necessary drawingsand analysis to gain their approval,but it might also result in an inabilityto apply reduced quantity-distancecriteria approved for the originaldesign.

Again, explosives site planning,and the overall explosives safetyprogram, is a team effort. Workingtogether will ensure a smooth

The explosives siteplan map is used tographically showrelationshipsbetween the facilitybeing sited andsurroundingexposures.(Courtesy AFSC)

explosives site planning process, savemoney on construction contracts and,most importantly, ensure our com-manders have the people and assetsthere when they need them toaccomplish the mission.

Maj Gen Timothy A. Peppe was the AirForce Chief of Safety and commanderof the Air Force Safety Center, KirtlandAFB, NM. He is now the specialassistant to the vice chief of staff for theAir Expeditionary Forces, Headquar-ters U.S. Air Force, Pentagon.

HILL AFB EXPLOSIVES SITE PLANModular Storage Magazine

Building 1429Attachment 2

14 SPRING 2002

Hangar 5, an historic landmark, sat dilapidated andunavailable for its functional purpose at Pope Air ForceBase, N.C., for years awaiting someone to recognize itspotential contribution to the mission. Then, last year,someone did. Pope�s 23rd Fighter Group seized upon anidea to transform supply credits into much needed indoorhangar space. What ensued was atwo-year journey oflearning, planningand position-ing.Ultimately, acontract wasawarded torepair the unusedhangar to usable condition.

Constructed at PopeField�Fort Bragg in 1933,Hangars 4 and 5 were adouble hangar project. They were completed by a contrac-tor at a cost of $175,590 and contained 45,476 square feetof floor space. Subsequent modifications added heat in1957; and limited structural renovations over the yearsbrought the square footage to its current 53,000.

The history of the two hangars diverged in 1975,when the Army decided to operate helicopters at Pope(the Army owns Pope AFB). Hangar 5 was converted tooffice space for helicopter mission personnel by anchor-ing modular sections within its bay.

The helicopter mission remained only three years, butthe office space stood unused afterward. Between 1975 andthe present, Hangar 4 remained operational for aircraftmaintenance, while Hangar 5 stood unavailable. Noappreciable real property maintenance had been performedinside Hangar 5 for more than 25 years, leaving it unfitfor aircraft maintenance and in very poor condition.

Learning, planning and positioningIn 1997, Pope AFB control transferred from Air

Combat Command to Air Mobility Command. The planwas to leave the 23rd FG, the Air Force�s largest activeduty group of A-10s, located at Pope temporarily as anACC tenant on an AMC installation. However, in 2000its location was made permanent. Once this determina-tion was made, the 23rd FG began seeking ways to addto its six existing indoor maintenance bays. Hangar 5was proposed to the host civil engineer squadron as apossibility to gain maintenance spaces and consolidatedispersed maintenance functions. CE responded thatthere were no other plans for the facility, and that use bythe 23rd FG would be possible; however, no funds wereavailable to design the facility�s repair.

At this point the 23rd FG commander invited hiscomptroller to get involved and seek funds to repairHangar 5. Thus began the education process. Theimmediate funding question dealt with the type of fundsrequired; the proverbial �color of money� question. Boththe design and repair work had to use the same �color�

funds. The answer revolvedaround the type of

work to bedone.

Theobjective

was to returnthe existing

structure to usableaircraft maintenance space

by repairing the walls, doors,floors, hoists, offices, ground-ing and electrical components.

Ultimately, the project included HVAC and, due to appli-cable code requirements for such repairs, fire suppression.Consultation between the comptroller and the CES pro-grams chief, while referencing the applicable Air ForceInstructions, determined that this project fell under theheading of repair. AFI 32-1032 states, �Repair means torestore real property and real property systems or compo-nents to such a condition that they may effectively be usedfor their designated functional purposes.� Decidedly, theproposed project was repair; now, to definitely determinethe proper appropriation. Again referencing AFI 32-1032,�Repair of facilities, or functional areas of multipurposefacilities, using O&M funds is authorized by 10 U.S.C.§2811. There is no limitation on the amount of O&M fundsthat may be used for repair, but there are approval andnotification requirements, depending on the amount beingspent.� Approval and notification requirements are requiredon projects where the cumulative total exceeds $5 million �a total far beyond aspirations for this hangar.

CE estimated that an Architecture and Engineering(A&E) firm would charge $200,000 to design the neededrepairs; so the 23rd FG set out to find funding sources.One immediate source was their own Repair Enhance-ment Program (a.k.a. Gold Flag) credits, generated bylocal repair of unserviceable parts. The 23rd FG com-

by C

apt D

avid

L. P

eele

r, Jr

.23

rd F

G

Broken Parts = Hangar SpaceFunding the repair of an abandoned hangar

The �Hangar 5 team� consisted of Capt David Peelerand CMSgt Luis Burgos, 23rd FG; Mr. Karl Miller and Ms.Mary Linehan, 43rd CES; and Mr. John Howard and TSgt

Patrick Boyd, 43rd CONS.

Guest FeatureGuest Feature

The double hangar at Pope Field, circa 1934. Hangar 5 is inthe foreground with door closed. (Photos courtesy 23 FG)


mander and comptroller devised a plan to split the designbill four ways with its parent units using HeadquartersNinth Air Force Commander Reserve Funds, Headquar-ters ACC matching funds, and 347th Wing contributions(the 23rd FG was re-aligned to the 4th Fighter Wing inJune 2000). To the surprise of many, this resourceful plancame together and a design contract was awarded withinfour months. The funding plan was conceived in May;funds arrived from external sources in July; and thedesign contract award occurred in August 2000.

The design progressed throughout the fall, but stalledin February due to a pending headquarters decision onswitching fire suppression systems from Aqueous FilmForming Foam (AFFF) to High Expansion Foam (HEF).HEF was decided upon in April. We awaited the deci-sion because the HEF system cost $500,000 less than theAFFF. However, the delay ultimately prevented theproject�s inclusion on Pope�s straddle bid submission, as itwasn�t 100 percent designed and ready to advertise by therequired April date.

In the meantime, the 23rd FG�s Gold Flag programwas amassing credits, providing a fall-back plan to thestraddle bid process. At the end of the first quarter offiscal year 2001, the Gold Flag shop had generated morethan $800,000 in cost savings. By February 2001, thegroup had almost enough to fund half the repair project,which was then estimated at $2.3 million.

With the availability of Gold Flag credits for morethan half the estimated project cost, the comptrollerproposed a two-front funding strategy: fund one-half theHangar 5 repair project using unit funding as leverage toget the other half funded via a major command

(MAJCOM) split; andhave the A&E firmdesign the project intophases. The latter beingan inefficient method toaccomplish the needed

repairs, but a quickerroute to returning thefacility to usable hangarspace rather thanwaiting for future,programmed funding.

While bothMAJCOM CE represen-tatives were skepticalabout the possibility ofexecuting the contractwith an estimateddesign delivery date of July 26, 2001, the team continuedto do the advance work necessary to fund and award thecontract.

When the 90 percent design review was accom-plished in late June, the A&E design approach and thechange from AFFF to HEF fire suppression had reducedthe repair estimate from $2.3 to $1.6 million. Based onthis, the 23rd FG quickly reassessed the viability of thetwo funding strategies employed, viewing the new, lowerestimated cost as an opportunity to either fund the projectoutright with Gold Flag credits, if it came to that, orretain a portion of their Gold Flag credits to fund othermission requirements, provided the MAJCOMs wereforthcoming with a fair share.

Bid solicitation closed August 29; previous perfor-mance checks were accomplished; and the legal reviewcompleted for a contract award on September 12. Bypriming the process, contracting completed the solicita-tion and award process � from receipt of design,funding already committed, to award acceptance � inonly 35 business days.

Then more good news � ACC and AMC providedan equal sharing of $600,000 as a �rebate� for a portionof the $1.62 million in Gold Flag credits being obligatedon the contract award, providing $600,000 for equip-ment needs previously deferred in the interest ofincreasing 23rd FG hangar space.

Something ventured, something gainedMission gains that will be achieved by repairing

Hangar 5: a 40 percent increase in the tenant group�sindoor maintenance space; a 16 percent increase in overallPope AFB indoor maintenance space; a 15 percentreduction in the 23rd Maintenance Squadron commander�sspan of control, consolidating his entire Operations Flightinto a single location; and the potential to increase 23rdFG aircraft availability by three aircraft per month.

The 16-month adventure had come to fruition �returning an abandoned hangar and historic landmark toits status as a productive contributor to mission accom-plishment.

Capt David L. Peeler, Jr. is the 23rd Fighter GroupComptroller, Pope AFB, NC.

No appreciable realproperty maintenance hadbeen performed insideHangar 5 for more than 25years, leaving it unfit foraircraft maintenance andin very poor condition.Photos show erodeddoorframe and walldamage inside Hangar 5.

Hangar 5�s floor was converted to office spacefor helicopter mission personnel in 1975 byanchoring modular sections within its bay.

16 SPRING 2002

Since portable firearms wereinvented, projectiles made from leadhave been fired from them. Leadmakes an ideal bullet � cheap, denseand easily worked. Only the bullet�saccuracy and lethality mattered untilrecently.

The U.S. Environmental Protec-tion Agency estimates that in theUnited States alone, more than80,000 tons of lead is used each yearto manufacture small arms ammuni-tion. Much of this mass enters theenvironment at small arms ranges,raising concern about their long-termviability.

Many ranges now in use wereconstructed decades ago and werenot designed to limit or contain themigration of lead into the environ-ment and sub-surface groundwateraquifers. An estimated 2,000 militaryand civilian ranges have been closedbecause of lead-related environmentalor health problems, or from fear oflitigation over such problems.Control of lead hazards has becomeessential for continued range use,especially for law enforcement andmilitary ranges that must protecttheir firearms training mission.

�The AETC range situation wasa perfect example of �spin-the-bottle�

management,� said Col Rusty Gilbert, the Air Education and TrainingCommand Civil Engineer. �No group wanted to take responsibility forsolving these problems because they were seen as someone else�s. Meanwhile,the user, security forces, was left holding the bag because the base engineerswere waiting for money � anyone�s. We had to fix this goat rope.�

AETC formed a tiger team, including civil engineers, bioenvironmentalengineers and security forces, to identify root causes of small arms rangeenvironmental contamination and health risks and formulate corrective andpreventive actions. The team conducted interviews of range personnel inconjunction with on-site surveys of all ranges within the Command. The teamalso provided on-the-spot recommendations and guidance for correctingproblems identified during their surveys. Following is a summary of thefindings and recommendations of the AETC team.

Range DesignNo two Air Force ranges are exactly alike. This design diversity makes

elimination of existing range health and environmental problems difficult.Range designers formerly gave little consideration to environmental andhealth protection issues. In fact, the designs of some existing ranges contrib-uted to health and environmental problems. Design of new ranges orupgrades to existing ranges should consider the following recommendationsto ensure future mission achievement:

Ventilation: Many ranges have inadequate ventilation, possibly contribut-ing to the exposure of shooters and range staff to airborne lead. Properventilation must be incorporated into the original design, as it is difficult andexpensive to correct an inadequate ventilation system after the range has beenbuilt. The services of designers who specialize in the unique problems ofrange ventilation should be used during the design phase.

Drainage: If a range is exposed to storm water, lead and soluble leadcompounds from fired projectiles can be flushed into the surrounding area,polluting soil and ground and surface waters. Therefore, runoff control and soilamendment must be incorporated into range design. Proper site grading,retention ponds and runoff filter beds can control lead transport. Ranges mustnever be located or designed to drain directly into natural surface water bodies.Acidic soils, especially if used for constructing earth berm bullet backstops, cancause corrosion of metallic lead, producing soluble lead compounds. Amendmentof range soils with crushed limestone or other materials to achieve a pH of 7 to8, and lead precipitants, such as phosphates, will eliminate the spread of leadcorrosion products. Indoor range floors should not be provided with floor drainsthat will allow contaminated floor-washing wastewater to escape. HEPA vacuum-ing, damp mopping, or use of a floor-washing machine are preferred for rangefloor cleaning, using approved procedures.

Sound Control: Weapons firing in enclosed or partially enclosed rangescan produce excessive noise levels that threaten hearing, even if ear protec-tion is used. Unpainted range walls made of ordinary concrete blocks absorbsound well, and there are special acoustic concrete blocks manufactured forthis purpose. Bare block walls should not be painted, as this destroys theirsound absorbing properties.

Floors: Pea gravel range floors are common but undesirable. Bullets canricochet at high angles from gravel, creating a safety problem. Also, gravelcan become contaminated with lead particles. This makes cleaning impos-sible and also makes eventual disposal of gravel costly as a regulated waste.

Small Arms RangesLead contamination becomes a target

Air Force personnel train at the small arms range atRandolph AFB, TX. Lead used to manufactureammunition enters the environment at both militaryand civilian small arms ranges, raising concern abouttheir environmental viability.(Photos courtesy HQ AETC/CEV)

by D

enni

s W

. Kir

sch,

P.E.

HQ

AETC

TechnologyTechnologyA New Era For


Smooth, sealed concrete floors are preferred, as they are easily cleaned and donot produce high-angle ricochets.

Maintenance: Ranges should be designed to facilitate maintenance. If asteel bullet trap is to be used, generous access space behind it should be pro-vided. Ranges also should be designed to allow entry of heavy maintenanceequipment, as appropriate.

Exposure Control: Electric-powered target carriers should be providedas they greatly reduce personnel exposure to lead-contaminated downrangesurfaces and also eliminate the time wasted in walking back and forth fromthe firing line to check or replace targets.

Bullet TrapsSteel Traps: Many Air Force ranges use steel bullet traps. Impact with a

steel trap bursts the bullet, generating lead dust and fragments that contaminatethe area around the trap. Cleaning of steel traps requires periodic emptying ofbullet capture receptacles, possibly exposing range personnel to lead dust. Anew Air Conveyor System (ACS) is currently being tested at Randolph AirForce Base, TX. The ACS replaces these receptacles with a vacuum system thatremoves bullet residue to a sealed drum as it is produced. This reduces trapcleaning cost and frequency and decreases personnel exposure to lead.

A roof extending at least 5 feet in front of the trap should cover steelbullet traps located outdoors. The roof helps prevent storm water contact withthe high concentration of lead dust on the floor.

Earth Berms: Earth berm backstops are environmentally acceptable ifproperly designed, constructed and maintained. Fired bullets can accumulateexcessively in the berm, causing ricochets. When this occurs, the backstop soilshould be excavated, screened of bullets and replaced. This is consistent withEPA range guidance, and does not require a permit if the recovered bullets arerecycled for metals recovery. Adding covering soil when a berm is overloadedwith fired bullets is expedient but not recommended, as it will create futurerange maintenance and environmental problems. Certain polymer soil additivesand some plants are effective in reducing berm erosion. A roof covering the

berm can limit storm water exposure and erosion, as well as ricochets.Other Traps: There are many other bullet traps now on the

market, the most popular being a rubber media trap. This is essen-tially a berm made of chopped rubber tires. Reports on the suitability

of this trap tend to be negative in high-usage environments.

The new Air Conveyor System (ACS)currently being tested at Randolph AFB.The ACS replaces bullet trap receptacleswith a vacuum system that removesbullet residue to a sealed drum as it isproduced.

The U.S. Army has experimentedextensively with shock-absorbingconcrete (SAC) as a bullet trap. SACis a soft concrete capable of absorbingmultiple bullet impacts, and it can berecycled when it has reached itsholding limit. Evaluation of thistechnology is incomplete. Theenvironmental and health advantagesproposed for these traps include betterbullet capture while minimizing leadcorrosion and dust generation.

Getting the Lead OutIf lead is eliminated from ammuni-

tion, lead-related health andenvironmental problems vanishregardless of range design. Non-toxicLead-Free Ammunition (LFA) in 9mmand 5.56mm calibers from commercialmanufacturers is now used for trainingat over seven Air Force base ranges,with more to be added soon.

These bullets are made of nylonfilled with copper and tungsten. Fortraining, LFA functions in unmodi-fied weapons exactly as ballammunition does. LFA is moreexpensive than ball ammunition, butreduction in personnel exposure tolead, plus cost savings from reducedrange cleaning, largely compensatesfor its increased cost.

LFA technology is advancingrapidly due to demands from militaryservices and civilian law enforcementagencies. Future use of less-expensivematerials and larger-scale productionwill lower LFA ammunition costsubstantially.

The Air Force is moving rapidlytoward broader adoption of LFA,while developing new range designguidance to address current envi-ronmental and health concerns fromthe use of conventional ammuni-tion. This combined approach willforce a re-evaluation of rangedesign and operations to bettermanage lead hazards.

Dennis W. Kirsch is an environmentalengineer in the Environmental QualityBranch of the Environmental Division,HQ AETC Directorate of The CivilEngineer, Randolph AFB, TX.

Lead-free ammunition (LFA) in 5.56mm and 9mmcalibers is now used for training at over sevenAir Force ranges. The bullets are made of nylon filledwith copper and tungsten. The 5.56mm bullets arejacketed and 9mm bullets are unjacketed.

18 SPRING 2002

Fairchild Air Force Base, WA,has teamed with Honeywell EnergyServices under the Energy SavingsPerformance Contract (ESPC)umbrella and signed a performance-based contract that will save thegovernment more than $34 millionover the next 20 years. The plan is toreplace Fairchild�s old centralizedsteam plant with high-efficiency, low-maintenance, localized boilers thathave fewer operating expenses andallow less energy loss.

Additionally, the measurement andverification (M&V) plan developed forthis project could likely set the standardfor such efforts in the future.

Making the SwitchSeventy-nine buildings will be

disconnected from Fairchild�s agingcentral steam plant and 110 high-efficiency, natural gas, low-pressure,steam and hot water boilers installed(5 large, 93 medium and 12 small).The switch will capture and divertenergy and operational savings fromthe old, high-maintenance, high-pressure steam plant and its associatedsupply and condensate return lines.The new boilers are guaranteed tocollectively have post-installationthermal efficiencies equal to an averageof 85 percent or better throughout the20-year life of the contract.

The energy team at the Air ForceCivil Engineer Support Agency,Tyndall AFB, FL, was instrumental indetermining natural gas utility rates tobe used throughout the term of thecontract. In the short term, these ratesare known due to existing contracts.Annual rates thereafter were estimatedusing National Institute of Standardsand Technology escalation projec-tions. Utility rates were specified as�firm� for savings calculationsthroughout the term of the contract.

Measuring & VerifyingThe plan to reliably and eco-

nomically measure and validatesavings was a challenge. Sincesavings fund the project, whichincludes M&V expenses over the lifeof the contract, M&V expensesshould be kept as low as possible. If

Steamed-Up About SavingsDecentralization results in a model M&V plan

&The

MeasurementAn M&V plan is essential to

verifying that all guaranteed energysavings actually exist. The develop-ment team for the Fairchild projectcame up with a four-step M&V planthat provides an effective model fordecentralizing central heat systems atminimum overhead expense.

Step 1: Establish the currentspending baseline. The baseline yearwas established by using year 2000boiler plant data. A linear regressionfit of the year 2000 data was used tocompare multiple past years, whichconfirmed that the year 2000 was arepresentative baseline.

Step 2: Install new equipmentand establish a boiler efficiency�baseline.� Natural gas meters will beinstalled for each facility. Prior tocommissioning acceptance, all newlyinstalled boiler thermal efficiencieswill be measured, summarized anddocumented to ensure they areworking as expected. Boiler efficiencymeasurements will be per AmericanSociety of Mechanical Engineers(ASME) Power Test Code 4.1 (PTC4.1) requirements. All meters will beread at the beginning of year one,establishing the �start point� or �zeropoint� from which all successivemeter readings will be taken.

the cost of the M&V plan is asignificant percentage of the con-tract, then the plan limits theinfrastructure improvement opportu-nities available from the savings.

Normally these calculations arethe most difficult part of a perfor-mance-based savings contract.AFCESA addressed this issue byproactively establishing a contractwith Texas A&M University toprovide third party M&V exper-tise. Agreement on a workablesolution for this project camequickly � the result of planningM&V considerations early in thecontract process along withAFCESA guidance and expertconsulting support from TexasA&M. The template that evolvedcould likely set the standard fordecentralized retrofits.

A bird�s eye viewof steam plant

building 2175 atFairchild AFB. A

central steamplant has onlyan 84 percent

thermalefficiency (lotsof heat energy

goes up thesmokestack). By

the time steamreaches distant

buildings, itsthermal

efficiency dropsto around 55

percent. (Photocourtesy 92ndCivil Engineer

Squadron)

by L

t Col

Car

l J. W

oude

n, P

hDHQ

AM

C

Verification Plan


ESPC Help Line

Teaming Up for SavingsContract signing occurred in

December 2001 and construction isunderway. The project was truly acollaborative effort, which includedFairchild AFB (engineering, opera-tions, contracting, energymanagement), AFCESA, Headquar-ters Air Mobility Command andHoneywell. Special thanks go toTSgt Mike Gilbert, contractingofficer; Tom Sullivan, PE, contract-ing specialist; SMSgt Jerry Barnes,HQ AMC; Bill Turner, PE, Fairchildenergy manager; Mike Cross, PE,

AFCESA engineer; Dr. Charles Culp,PE, Texas A&M University projectconsultant; the Honeywell EnergyServices Development Team led byMike Paesani and Sylvia Berry-Lewis, Honeywell M&V specialist.

All parties involved feel thesatisfaction of a win-win conclusion

The AFCESA energy team conducts monthly �call me� conference calls to discuss concerns andsolutions for bases interested in Energy Savings Performance Contracts. This service is provided forAir Force contracting, civil engineer, legal and financial management personnel.

ESPC satellite training classes are also being offered this year. The next class is scheduled for Aug.20, and the sign-up deadline is July 15. More information is available on the ESPC page on AFCESA�sweb site (www.afcesa.af.mil) or by calling DSN 523-6236, or commercial (850) 283-6236.

Step 3: Determine complianceat the end of 12 months. During yearone, the individual gas meters for all79 buildings will be read eachmonth. At the end of 12 months,consumption will be totaled andweather-normalized. Baseline datawill also be adjusted if square footageassociated with the 79 buildings hasincreased or decreased. Compliancewith the first year guarantee will bedetermined by subtracting post-installation, weather-normalized gasconsumption from baseline weather-normalized gas consumption. Annualsavings will be multiplied by the�firm� unit cost of natural gas todetermine annual dollar savings.

Step 4: Establish the representa-tive set for future compliance. Giventhat year one savings have been met,a baseline efficiency measure will beestablished for a representative set(sample set) of boilers. Efficiencymeasurements will be taken from thesample set, which will consist of allfive large steam boilers, 10 medium-sized boilers and one small boilerchosen by Fairchild AFB.

Results from the 16 boilerefficiency measurements will be usedto calculate a British Thermal Unit(BTU) overall Weighted AverageEfficiency (WAE). The BTU WAEvalue for year one will then becomethe baseline efficiency. In eachsubsequent year throughout the termof the contract, a 16-boiler sample setselected by Fairchild AFB must meetor exceed this baseline efficiency inorder to meet the savings guarantee.

The yearly guarantee will besatisfied if the sample set WAE equalsor exceeds year one WAE, assumingyear one metered results satisfy theenergy savings guarantee. If theguaranteed savings are not met, thecontractor�s annual payment is adjustedto compensate for the shortage.

WAE is calculated as follows:Determine the BTU weighted

efficiency of each measured boiler bymultiplying the measured efficiency(ME) by the boiler BTU capacitydivided by the sum of the BTUcapacities for all same size categoryboilers in the sample set.

Determine the Average Effi-ciency (Al, Am, As) for eachcategory by summing all weightedefficiencies for all measured boilersin each size category.

Determine the overall BTUWAE by summing the AverageEfficiency of each category multi-plied by the total BTU capacity of allboilers in each category divided bythe total BTU capacity of boilers inall categories.

Summary examples:Al = sum of: ME * measured

boiler BTU capacity/total largesample set BTU capacity.

Am = sum of: ME * measuredboiler BTU capacity/total mediumsample set BTU capacity.

As = sum of: ME * measuredboiler BTU capacity/total smallsample set BTU capacity.

WAE = Al * total BTU capacityof large boilers/total BTU capacity ofall categories +

Am * total BTU capacity ofmedium boilers/total BTU capacityof all categories +

As * total BTU capacity of smallboilers/total BTU capacity of allcategories.

Note: The data from the commis-sioning set of efficiency tests will beretained and included with the annualsample set boiler efficiency calcula-tion. In general, either Fairchild AFBor Honeywell Energy Services, theAir Force Region 5 Energy SavingsContractor responsible for ESPCdevelopment at Fairchild, retains theright to request additional boilerefficiency tests at the requestor�sexpense. The base will select theadditional boilers to be tested. Allinstrument calibrations will be verifiedprior to taking measurements.

This plan promises to be anexcellent means of assuring thesavings guarantee with minimalmeasurements and worry aboutweather and floor space normaliza-tion. Baseline adjustments will onlybe made for performance year onewhere metered data is being used todetermine if the guarantee has beenmet. M&V costs are less than onepercent of contract investment costs� substantially under the costsallowed in the International Perfor-mance Measurement and VerificationProtocol (IPMVP-2001) from theDepartment of Energy.

ESPC Help Line

to a successful project development.Now the work begins. The savingswill be significant.

Lt Col Wouden is the command energymanager for HQ Air Mobility Com-mand, Scott AFB, IL, and was a teammember on this project.

20 SPRING 2002

Air Force civil engineers across the continental United Statesare facing the fiscal and technological challenge of upgrading orreplacing most of their current base radio systems over the nextthree to five years. This replacement program will bring Air Forcecivil engineer radio assets into compliance with federal narrowbandrequirements, which will provide more frequency channels for newand emerging wireless technologies.

The Radio SpectrumWireless radio-based systems transmit and/or receive voice or

data signals across the radio frequency spectrum. The radio spec-trum is that portion of the electromagnetic spectrum that caneffectively transmit and receive radio waves.

Unlike oil, natural gas and coal, the electromagnetic spectrum isa renewable natural resource. If every radio user were to stoptransmitting, the entire spectrum would be instantly available forother users. On the other hand, when the number of transmissionsexceeds the capacity of the frequency band, interference occurs. Thisinterference reduces the amount of useful information transmittedand received.

In developed areas of the world, there is constant pressure toregulate the radio spectrum to make room for additional users. Notonly are there more users seeking existing services, but there arealso new services that require additional radio spectrum. These newand different services are placing a heavy demand on radio spectrum� greater than previously envisioned.

In the United States, two federal government agencies areresponsible for spectrum allocation (i.e., frequency channel assign-ments) and system specifications. The Federal Communications

Commission (FCC) regulates radio spectrumfor all non-federal government use, includingaeronautical and maritime mobile services. TheNational Telecommunications & InformationAdministration (NTIA) regulates spectrumused by agencies of the federal government,including the Department of Defense.

The History of Channel Splitting(i.e., narrowbanding)

Back in the 1940s, frequency channelswere spaced every 120 kilohertz (kHz).Advances in radio technology and the limitednumber of available frequency channelsresulted in the first split of 120 kHz channelspacing to 60 kHz. As technology continuedto advance and the type and number of radio-based systems increased, channel spacing wasagain split in half to 20�30 kHz depending onthe frequency band that was overly congested.This allowed four or more additional usablefrequency channels to be placed in the same120 kHz that previously accommodated one.Four times as many users could be handled,thus dramatically increasing radio spectrumutilization. This phenomenon is called channelsplitting and has been used extensively tosupport wireless radio-based technologygrowth.

In parts of Europe, channel spacing hasbeen further reduced to 12.5 kHz. Thisnarrowing of channels has required a numberof transmitter and receiver technology en-hancements in order to prevent interferencewith adjacent frequency channel users.

The Narrowband MandateThe United States is following Europe�s

lead. In order to increase the number offrequency channels available to new andexisting users within the United States and itspossessions (US&P), the NTIA has mandatedthe decrease of channel spacing from 25 kHzto 12.5 kHz. The NTIA narrowband mandatealso decreases the maximum occupied band-width that a signal can have from 16 to 11kHz. By decreasing channel spacing andoccupied bandwidth, the number of frequencychannels that can be assigned to radio fre-quency users doubles.

A new mandate calls for narrowbanding civil engineer radio systems

Splitting Channelsby

Fre

d Ne

hrin

gs a

nd D

ave

Mat

hew

sHQ

AFC

ESA

Nearly all civil engineer radio-based systems, such as the MonacoEnterprises BT2-3 fire alarm transceiver radio unit being examined byA1C Lance Carson, 325th CES, Tyndall AFB, FL, above, will be impactedby the NTIA narrowband mandate. (Photos by Dave Mathews)


The NTIA narrowband mandate requiresall federal users of the radio spectrum toconvert to narrowband technology by thefollowing deadlines: (Again, this NTIAnarrowband mandate applies only to federalusers of the radio spectrum within the US&P.Installations outside the US&P must complywith host nation frequency regulations.)

� 162-174 MHz VHF Band � Legacy systemsmust be converted by Jan. 1, 2005

� 138-150.8 MHz VHF Band � Legacy sys-tems must be converted by Jan. 1, 2008

� 406.1-420 MHz UHF Band � Legacy sys-tems must be converted by Jan. 1, 2008

The only exceptions are military radiosystems used for tactical and/or trainingoperations and existing command destructsystems in the 406.1�420 MHz band. Thesesystems are exempt from the NTIAnarrowband mandate. There are no otherprovisions for waivers, deviations or delayedimplementation.

CE Systems AffectedNearly all active duty, Air National Guard

and Air Force Reserve wireless radio-basedsystems used for sustaining base operations ona daily basis are impacted by the NTIAnarrowband mandate. Some of these systemsmay include, but are not limited to: fire andsecurity alarms, land mobile radios, HVACsystems, industrial controls, remote barriercontrols, refrigeration systems, bird aircraftstrike hazard systems, utilities (EMCS �energy monitoring and control systems andSCADA � supervisory control and dataacquisition), giant voice public address

This graph represents 25 kHz and 12.5 kHzchannel spacing. (Courtesy HQ AFCESA)

systems, runway ice detection, irrigationsystems, load management switches, emer-gency generators and command destructsystems.

Other functional areas that may feel theimpact include unique wireless radio-basedsystems used by hazardous materials, wildlifepreservation, natural resources and readinesspersonnel. As you can see, civil engineerradios encompass a wide range of technolo-gies beyond land mobile radios and �bricks�(portable two-way radios).

Help is AvailableThe Air Force Civil Engineer Support

Agency at Tyndall Air Force Base, FL,established a Narrowband Compliance HelpDesk Oct. 1, 2001, to assist major com-mands with and provide Air Force-wideoversight for converting civil engineerowned, operated and maintained wirelessradio-based equipment to narrowbandtechnology.

Help Desk personnel are providingtechnical and programmatic assistance tomajor command and base civil engineers inorder to meet the NTIA mandate. The HelpDesk operates from 8 a.m.�4 p.m. CST andwill be the focal point for most radio-basedsystems and solutions. Help Desk personnelwill contact the major manufacturers of civilengineer equipment for narrowband compli-ance information, replacement parts, upgradekits, approximate costs, etc. and disseminatethe information to major command head-quarters and installations.

The Help Desk has also implementedtwo automated tools for major command andbase civil engineer use: an on-line registra-tion page for narrowband points-of-contactand an on-line database for capturing allradio-based equipment owned, operated andmaintained by Air Force civil engineers. Inaddition to these useful tools, numeroushyperlinks to reference material are availablefor viewing and downloading. These toolscan be accessed on AFCESA�s secure website at: https://wwwmil.afcesa.af.mil/Direc-torate/CES/Mechanical/NarrowBand/default.htm.

Fred Nehrings and Dave Mathews are projectengineers at HQ AFCESA, Tyndall AFB, FL,and members of the Narrowband ComplianceHelp Desk team.

22 SPRING 2002

Education & Training

Time and training stop for no one. Especially atSheppard Air Force Base, TX, where T-37s and T-38s fillthe runway and the sky training the next generation ofAir Force pilots. Training is inherently dangerous, andwhen mishaps occur the 82nd Civil Engineer Squadronfire department screams onto the runway to save the day.

Unfortunately, if an incident occurred on the outer apron ornortheast edge of the runway, their crash response vehiclesmight not reach pilots in jeopardy fast enough.

The Air Force standard for crash response is under 3minutes to any part of an airfield for unannouncedemergencies. At Sheppard, fire trucks leaving from themain fire station next to the control tower took almost 6

minutes to reach the outer apron and northeast edgeof the runway. In an attempt to meet the Air

Force requirement, fire trucks would patrolaccess roads from an alert area near the

center of the airfield. Practice crashresponses averaged 5:42 to the outer

runway and 5:15 to the parkingapron at the second busiestmilitary airfield in the world.Sheppard needed a new firestation and quick.

The 819th RED HORSESquadron from MalmstromAFB, MT, was ready for thechallenge. Plans called for theunit to leave the first week ofOctober 2001, but the eventsof Sept. 11 froze the team inplace awaiting word fromhigher headquarters.

�We were ready to go toSheppard, but now we just

wanted to join the fight,� saidSSgt William Brookins, 819th

RHS structures craftsman. By themiddle of October the project was

back on and the team headed for theLone Star State. Twenty-six craftsmen

traveled the 1,600 miles to WichitaFalls, TX, excited to begin the newproject.

Education & Trainingby

Cap

t Rya

n J.

Nov

otny

819t

h RH

S819th RED HORSE

Flocks to Sheppard

The team digs earth formed footers for thebuilding foundation.(Photos courtesy 819th RHS)

Clockwise from top: The teamscreeds concrete footers andfoundation; SSgt Pat Bowles (left)and MSgt Mike Miller (right) discusstechniques for reinforcing the buildingfooter form prior to placing concrete; SSgtDavid Rhodes cuts interior siding to length;SSgt Bob Ward (left) and A1C Donald Mizellwork on building mezzanine; a crane is usedto lift the building center beam into place.


The mission at hand was to construct a pre-engi-neered building (PEB) with specialized overhead doors,overhead water fill stands, storage areas, a clean roomand a reinforced concrete foundation capable of support-ing the weight of 78,000-pound fire trucks.

�This building gave us opportunities to train on a lotof different wartime tasks,� said MSgt Mike Miller, theteam�s project manager. �We�ll be using them soon.�

The team completed the building for about $367K,more than $80K under the base�s estimated cost of$450K. Construction took 67 days to complete fromground breaking to ribbon cutting. That kept the teamaway from home during the Thanksgiving holiday, butthe crew was happy to be working. �It�s a great feeling tohelp in maybe saving a pilot or firefighter by just doingyour regular job,� said SSgt Chris Los, 819th RHSelectrical craftsman.

The new Auxiliary Fire Station stall completelyresolves the crash response deficiencies at Sheppard AFB.

�The station eliminates line standby, which disrupted day-to-day fire operations,� said Jeff Sukalski, Sheppard FireChief. �Fire station 3 will let us manage our day-to-daytraining, making the department more efficient,�he said.

The new Auxiliary Fire Station truck stall increasesthe safety factor for both pilots and fire departmentpersonnel. This building will save millions of dollars inAir Force assets, and more importantly lives.

�The response coverage improved drastically,� saidSukalski. Crash response time to the end of the runwayhas been cut in half to almost 2.5 minutes and the firedepartment has a new home at the end of the runway.

To The HORSE!

Capt Ryan J. Novotny is a civil engineer project officer atthe 819th RHS, Malmstrom AFB, MT, and was the deployedcommander of the team.

An explosion rocks theflightline during a routinemaintenance operationaboard a C-17. Threemaintainers are missing.Others report the emergencyto the command post. Withinminutes, firefighters are onthe move, racing toward thescene to save lives and fightthe raging fire.

That was the scenario foran emergency exercise held ata deployed location support-ing Operation ENDURING

FREEDOM recently. Althoughthe situation described abovedidn�t really happen, the 13members of the 40th Expedi-tionary Civil EngineerSquadron Fire Departmentroared into action as if itwere the real thing.

The exercise tested theabilities of firefighters with aC-17 aircraft, explainedSMSgt �Milo,� the fire chief.They train each month on allassigned aircraft to make surethey�re familiar with entryprocedures, aircraft shut-down and aircrew extraction.

Practice Life-Saving SkillsMost of the firefighters are

deployed from Seymour Johnson AirForce Base, NC. Milo, the onlyfirefighter deployed from MacDillAFB, FL, said the exercise wentextremely well.

�Firefighters positioned vehiclesto cover rescue crew membersentering the aircraft while deployinghand-lines from vehicles to fight thesimulated fire,� he said.

The firefighters are coping withthe real-world demands of a deployedenvironment, Milo said, but training

by M

Sgt B

ill L

inci

com

e40

th A

ir E

xped

ition

ary

Win

g Pu

blic

Aff

airs

Firefighters with the 40thExpeditionary CES FireDepartment remove a�victim� from a C-17Globemaster III as afellow firefighter standsby to assist during aground emergencyexercise at a deployedlocation. (Photos by SrARebeca M. Luquin)

Firefighters with the 40th Expeditionary CES FireDepartment remove their protective equipment aftercompleting a C-17 ground-emergency exercise.

Deployed Firefighters

is never set aside. �We only have afew minutes to get into the aircraftand save lives.�

24 SPRING 2002

Deep in the OzarkMountains of Missouri, inthe middle of Mark TwainNational Forest, a unit ofAir Force people is sta-tioned at the U.S. Army�sFt. Leonard Wood.

How did they getthere? It all started with the1990 Base Realignmentand Closure (BRAC)Commission and theInterservice TrainingReview Organization(ITRO). The groupsfunded a cost-savingdecision to place trainingunits of all militarybranches with similarmissions together. Thisgenerated many challenges,including a large relocationof military units andfamilies of sailors, airmenand marines to this U.S.Army post. Among thenewcomers � Air Educa-tion and TrainingCommand�s 366th TrainingSquadron, Detachment 7,from Sheppard Air ForceBase, TX.

Det 7 is considered asmall unit by Air Forcestandards. However, in thelast six years its membershave made contributions torival large Air Forceorganizations, generating

their internal and �physi-cally coined� alias: the“Magnificent 7.” Since itsactivation in 1995, Det 7has blossomed from thesmallest to the largesttraining detachment inAETC. Five of tensections directly supportAir Force permanent partypersonnel, temporary dutyand non-prior servicestudents.

One of two detach-ment sections responsiblefor Air Force-unique civil engineer and ITROtraining support for Air Force, Army, Navy and MarineCorps students is the Air Force Pavements and Construc-tion Equipment School. At 70 academic days, thePavements Maintenance and Construction EquipmentOperators Apprentice Course is the largest and longestAir Force technical training school at Ft. Leonard Wood.Instructors have also added a highly sought-after mobilefive-day Pavements Maintenance Inspection and RepairCourse to their inventory.

The second ITRO training school is AirForce Engineering. This group brings fourresident courses of instruction to Ft. LeonardWood: a multi-service, 63-day EngineeringApprentice Course; a 14-day Engineering DesignCourse; a 14-day Construction Surveying Course;and a 9-day Construction Materials TestingCourse. In addition, Engineering has a mobile17-day Contract Construction Inspector Course.

The Air Force Civil Engineer ReadinessSchool trains Air Force and international studentsin disaster response; nuclear, biological andchemical warfare training, detection and preven-tion; and also administers the Prime BEEFtraining program. This mission-critical sectioncontributes six courses to the detachment: a 53-day, three-level Readiness Apprentice Course; a10-day, seven-level Readiness Craftsman Course; a 5-dayAdvanced Readiness Course; a 5-day mobile Air-BaseOperability Course; and a 5-day resident and mobileNuclear/Biological/Chemical Control Cell Course.

The Magnificent 7by

MSg

t Rob

ert B

artle

baug

h36

6 TR

S, D

et 7

Training tomorrow�s Air Force civil engineers today

Although onceconsidered a candi-date for base closurefor lack of overallmission importance,Ft. Leonard Woodhas become one ofthe premier locationsfor Army and jointservice traininginitiatives. Thepeople of Det 7 havebeen blessed at theirnew home.

MSgt RobertBartlebaugh is the NCOICEquipment Operations,Pavements and Construc-tion Equipment OperatorCourse, 366 TRS, Det 7,Ft. Leonard Wood, MO.

SSgt Rich Davis (left) exchanges abiohazard simulator sample with TSgtDan Copsey. The Readinessinstructors are practicing their teachingskills while inspecting the M22 VaporDetector Unit outfitted with the latest inJoint Service Lightweight IntegratedSuit Technology.

Pavement and ConstructionEquipment Operator instructors use apower screed to place and finishconcrete for a self-help parking lotdriveway at Ft. Leonard Wood. (Photoscourtesy 366 TRS, Det 7)

Instructors teach ITRO EngineerApprentice students on their roadconstruction outer limits.

Det 7 carries out initial and advanced career field training for engineering technicians,pavements and equipment technicians, readiness technicians, vehicle operators andsecurity forces, and authors Career Development Courses for engineering, pavementsand equipment, readiness, and vehicle operations.

More information on Det 7can be found on their

web site:www.wood.army.mil/Det7


Course No.Course No.Course No.Course No.Course No. T i t l eT i t l eT i t l eT i t l eT i t l e O f fO f fO f fO f fO f f Start DateStart DateStart DateStart DateStart Date Grad DateGrad DateGrad DateGrad DateGrad DateMGT 422 (S) Project Management 02A 08-Jul-02 12-Jul-02MGT 444 (S) Competitive Sourcing 02A 08-Jul-02 12-Jul-02MGT 585 Contingency Engineer Command Course 02C 08-Jul-02 12-Jul-02ENV 521 (S) Hazardous Waste Management 02B 15-Jul-02 19-Jul-02MGT 101 Introduction to the Base Civil Engineer Org. 02C 22-Jul-02 14-Sep-02MGT 421 (S) Contracting for Civil Engineering 02B 22-Jul-02 02-Aug-02ENG 460 (S) Mechanical Systems for Managers 02A 05-Aug-02 09-Aug-02MGT 424 (S) Real Estate Property Management 02A 12-Aug-02 16-Aug-02ENG 470 (S) Electrical Systems for Managers 02A 19-Aug-02 23-Aug-02Seminar (S) Energy Savings Performance Contracts 02C 20-Aug-02 20-Aug-02ENG 440 (S) Roofing Design 02A 26-Aug-02 30-Aug-02Seminar (S) HAZWOPER Refresher 02G 27-Aug-02 27-Aug-02Seminar (S) HAZWOPER Refresher 02H 28-Aug-02 28-Aug-02ENG 555 (S) Airfield Pavement Construction Inspection 02B 09-Sep-02 13-Sep-02

36

6 T

rain

ing

Sq

uad

ron

AFI

TC

ivil

En

gin

eer

and

Serv

ices

Sch

oo

lRegistration forresident courses,which are offered atWright-PattersonAFB, OH, beginsapproximately 90days in advance.Applications mustgo through thestudent�s MAJCOMTraining Manager.Registration for thesatellite offerings,marked with an (S),closes 40 daysbefore broadcast.For satellite registra-tion, courseinformation, or acurrent list of classdates, visit theCESS website at:http://cess.afit.edu.

Sheppard AFB, TX

Course No.Course No.Course No.Course No.Course No. T i t l eT i t l eT i t l eT i t l eT i t l e Start DatesStart DatesStart DatesStart DatesStart Dates Grad DatesGrad DatesGrad DatesGrad DatesGrad DatesJ3AZR3E051-007 Airfield Lighting 10-Sep 19-SepJ3AZR3E051-008 Electrical Distribution Sys. Maint. 05-Aug/05-Sep 30-Aug/02-OctJ3AZR3E051-010 Bare Base Electrical Systems 30-Jul/23-Aug/17-Sep 10-Aug/06-Sep/28-SepJ3AZR3E051-012 Fire Alarm Systems 06-Aug/04-Sep/11-Sep/30-Sep 29-Aug/27-Sep/04-Oct/24-OctJ3AZR3E051-013 Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) 22-Jul/12-Aug/09-Sep 09-Aug/30-Aug/27-SepJ3AZR3E071-001 CE Adv. Elec. Troubleshooting 05-Aug/04-Sep 30-Aug/01-OctJ3AZR3E472-000 Liq. Fuels Stor. Tank Entry Spvsr. 17-Sep 27-SepJ3AZR3E451-004 Fire Suppression Systems Maint. 08-Jul/29-Jul/01-Sep 26-Jul/16-Aug/30-SepJ3AZR3E471-101 Bare Base Water Purification and 10-Jul/7-Aug/21-Aug/04-Sep 19-Jul/16-Aug/30-Aug/13-Sep

Distribution SystemsJ3AZR3E453-003 Pest Management Certification 08-Jul 02-Aug/30-Aug/15-OctJ3ARR3E453-002 Pest Management Re-Certification 15-Jul/09-Sep 19-Jul/13-SepJ3AZR3E052-013 CE Advanced Electronics 08-Jul/05-Aug/17-Sep 02-Aug/30-Aug/15-OctJ3AZR3E072-002 Troubleshoot. Elec. Power Gen. Eq. 08-Jul/31-Jul/26-Aug/19-Sep 29-Jul/21-Aug/17-Sep/10-OctJ3AZR3E072-113 Bare Base Power Generation 08-Jul/23-Sep 01-Aug/17-OctJ3AZR2F051-001 Fuels Quality Control 17-Jul/07-Aug/28-Aug/19-Sep 06-Aug/27-Aug/18-Sep/09-OctJ3AZR2F051-005 Cryotainer Maint. & Support Equip. 26-Jul/12-Aug 08-Aug/23-AugJ3AZR2F051-006 Cryogenics Production 09-Aug 09-OctJ3AZR2F051-007 Fuels Accounting 29-Jul/19-Aug/09-Sep 15-Aug/06-Sep/26-SepJ3AZR2F091-002 Petroleum Logistics Management 23-Jul/10-Sep 08-Aug/26-SepJ3AZR3E151-013 HVAC/R Controls Systems 22-Jul/09-Sep 23-Aug/11-OctJ3AZR3E151-014 Direct Expansion Systems 15-Jul/26-Aug/30-Sep 14-Aug/26-Sep/31-OctJ3AZR3E151-015 Indirect Expansion Systems 08-Jul/29-Jul/09-Sep 25-Jul/15-Aug/26-SepJ3AZR3E050-001 CE Work Estimating 08-Jul/16-Sep 26-Jul/04-Oct

Course No.Course No.Course No.Course No.Course No. T i t l eT i t l eT i t l eT i t l eT i t l e Start DatesStart DatesStart DatesStart DatesStart Dates Grad DatesGrad DatesGrad DatesGrad DatesGrad DatesJ3AZP3E571-003 Engineering Design 05-Aug 16-AugJ3AZP3E571-004 Construction Surveying 22-Jul/19-Aug 02-Aug/30-AugJ3AZP3E571-005 Construction Materials Testing 08-Jul 18-JulJ3AZP3E971-003 Advanced Readiness 15-Jul/09-Sep/23-Sep 19-Jul/13-Sep/27-SepJ3AZP3E971-005 NBC Cell Operations 08-Jul/19-Aug/09-Sep/23-Sep 12-Jul/23-Aug/13-Sep/27-Sep

Course No.Course No.Course No.Course No.Course No. T i t l eT i t l eT i t l eT i t l eT i t l e Start DatesStart DatesStart DatesStart DatesStart Dates Grad DatesGrad DatesGrad DatesGrad DatesGrad DatesJ5AZN3E871-001 Adv Access and Disablement 15-Jul/05-Aug/26-Aug/16-Sep 26-Jul/16-Aug/09-Sep/27-SepJ5AZN3E871-002 Advanced EOD Course 15-Jul/05-Aug 26-Jul/16-Aug

Course No.Course No.Course No.Course No.Course No. T i t l eT i t l eT i t l eT i t l eT i t l e Start DatesStart DatesStart DatesStart DatesStart Dates Grad DatesGrad DatesGrad DatesGrad DatesGrad DatesJ3AZP3E351-001 Low Slope Maint. & Repair 08-Jul/29-Jul/19-Aug/09-Sep 18-Jul/08-Aug/29-Aug/19-SepJ3AZP3E351-002 Fabrication Welded Pipe Joints 15-Jul/12-Aug/26-Aug/23-Sep 26-Jul/23-Aug/09-Sep/04-OctJ3AZP3E351-003 Metals Layout Fab. & Welding 22-Jul/03-Sep 08-Aug/20-Sep

Ft. Leonard Wood, MO

Indian Head, MD

Gulfport, MS

Additional course information is available on the 366th TRS web site at https://webm.sheppard.af.mil/366trs/default.htm.Students may enroll on a space-available basis up until the class� start date by contacting their unit training manager.

Continuing EducationWright-Patterson AFB, OH

26 SPRING 2002

CE World

The landscape was harsh andunrelenting, but felt somehowfamiliar to the Montanans who were6,700 miles from home. Called toIsrael for construction work, mem-bers of the 219th RED HORSEFlight had an opportunity to developtheir wartime skills in a deployedenvironment while experiencing adifferent culture.

The 219th RHF, a Montana AirNational Guard unit, deployed to anIsraeli Air Force base Jan. 2 through

Feb. 9 to provide heavy constructioncapabilities in support of U.S.European Command (USEUCOM)Exercise Related Construction (ERC).

CE World

RED HORSE Deploys to IsraelThe 15-memberteam constructed a119- by 48-footK-Span facility (ametal, Quonset-shaped contingencybuilding) andrepaired concreteairfield taxiways.

�These typesof deploymentsprovide not only skill developmentfor airmen, but also opportunities for

NCOs to developleadership ability,improve projectplanning profi-ciency and masterlogistics chal-lenges,� saidSMSgt BillGamradt, thenoncommissionedofficer in charge

of the deployment. Nearly all materi-als and equipment for the projectwere procured in country, necessitat-ing much more deliberate planningand host nation coordination than isnormally required.

K-Span construction provides anexcellent avenue for increasing troopmulti-skills because it requires alldisciplines (carpenters, equipmentoperators, vehicle mechanics, etc.) todevelop the ability to assist in avariety of specialty constructionareas. �I am very impressed withhow quickly a team comes togetheron this type of project and works asone unit,� said SrA Sonny Schlecht.

The team alsohad an opportunityto experience thelocal culture. Sinceall of the projectswere on an IsraeliAir Force base,service support andfacilities wereaccording to Israeli

custom and tradition. The host basedining facility provided messing.Although the troops were notaccustomed to the variety andlimitations of the food due to localkosher dietary requirements, allmeals were excellent. Another customobserved was the �Shabbat� orSabbath dinner served every Fridaynight after sundown. �All the peoplewe encountered, both military andcivilian, were very helpful andfriendly,� said TSgt Bob Lund.

The 219th RHF accomplishedthe mission ahead of schedule � aresult of strong leadership, goodmanagement and hard work. As theunit has done in Honduras, Guate-mala, Korea, Germany, and manyother countries, it not only completedquality construction projects for thecustomer, but also improved itscombat capability by building uponits base of discipline, cohesion andteamwork.(Capt Frederyck Cayer, 219th RHF)

These types ofdeployments provide notonly skill development forairmen, but alsoopportunities for NCOs todevelop leadership ability,improve project planningproficiency and masterlogistics challenges.

The K-Spanproject

provided theteam an

opportunity todevelop its

wartime skillsin a deployedenvironment

whileexperiencing

a differentculture.

Althoughthousands of

miles fromhome, the

landscape inIsrael had a

familiar feel tomembers of the

219th REDHORSE Flight

from Montana.(Photos courtesy

219th RHF)

The 15-member teamconstructed a K-Spanfacility and repairedconcrete airfieldtaxiways on the IsraeliAir Force base.

�

�


For some, the Vietnam era wasconsidered the best of times and theworst of times; but there is no doubt itwas a historic time for Air Force civilengineers.

As the U.S. build up in SoutheastAsia continued in the mid-1960s, the AirForce assumed greater control of con-struction and maintenance functions onits bases from the Army and Navy, whotraditionally performed most construc-tion at Air Force bases butwere unable to keep up withthe demand.

With no heavy construc-tion capability of its own,only Prime BEEF teamswhich performed lightconstruction and base mainte-nance functions, the Air Forceestablished a new type of unitin 1965 called RED HORSEthat was self-sufficient andcapable of carrying out heavyconstruction projects such asrunways and hardened aircraftshelters.

The first two REDHORSE squadrons were the555th, known as the TripleNickel, and the 554th,affectionately referred to byits members as The Penny Less. Acti-vated Oct. 1, 1965, they trained atCannon AFB, NM, and deployed toSoutheast Asia in early 1966.

Troops from the 554th were as-signed to Phan Rang AB and later DaNang AB, and the 555th�s troops wereassigned to Cam Rahn Bay AB. Eventu-ally five other RED HORSE units weretrained and deployed to Southeast Asia.

The Triple Nickel was inactivated in1969, but the 554th remained in Viet-nam for three more years before movingto Thailand in 1972 and to its currenthome at Osan AB, Korea, in 1976. Itwas the only RED HORSE unit toremain in theater after Vietnam, com-pleting many important projects in the1970s and 1980s.

A TALE of TWO SQUADRONSThe story of the Triple Nickel and the Penny Less

The 554th was downsized to almost caretaker status in the early 90s,going from a full sized (404-person) unit to less than 50, according to LtCol Joe Castro, Air Force Civil Engineer Readiness Program manager.Two years ago the unit was �robusted� to 139 people but still lacked someof the capabilities of a full-sized RED HORSE Squadron.

�That�s when the Guard and Reserves stepped up and said, �we canfill that capability.�� Castro said.

The Air National Guard activated the 254th RED HORSE Flight inlate 2000 at Camp Murray, WA, and the Air Force Reserve activated the555th at Nellis AFB, NV, in 2001, resurrecting the 555th�s name andheritage.

Although the 555th and554th are serving togetheragain, they are no longersister squadrons. The 554this �Mother Horse� to the555th and 254th. Duringcontingencies and deploy-ments, both units areassigned to the 554th. Thiscombination of active duty,Guard and Reserve forcesmakes it the first-known�Total Force� civil engineersquadron in the Air Force.

�The challenge for all ofus is integrating active,Guard and Reserve forcesinto a total force squadron,�said Castro. �We�ll beconducting a lot of trooptraining projects in Korea

for members of the 254th and the 555th.�Castro said training will focus on construction techniques and the

unit�s responsibilities throughout the Korean peninsula, important sinceGuard and Reserve members will make up more than half the squadron�sforce.

Guardsmen and Reservists will deploy to Korea as part of their two-week annual training, which will supply the 554th with a continuousrotation of personnel.

�Most of the active duty members are here on one-year remotetours,� Castro said, �so eventually the Guard and Reserve are going to bethe continuity in this total force squadron and they may be teaching theactive force what to do in country.�

The times, they are a changing.(TSgt Michael A. Ward, Air Force Civil Engineer Support Agency PublicAffairs)

�Hold on to that. You might need it later.� Sage advice thatproved its worth recently when the last commander of the555th RHS, Col (ret) Ray Medeiros, passed the unit�soriginal Vietnam-era guidon to the newest commander, LtCol Frank Myers � 32 years later. (Photo by Lois Walker)

Editor’s note: Lt Col Castro will leavethe Pentagon in July to become the

commander of the 554th.

28 SPRING 2002

CE PeopleCE People

Kathleen I. Ferguson is the new Deputy Air Force Civil Engineer,Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Washington DC.

A member of the Senior Executive Service, Ms. Ferguson is formerlychief, Combat Support Division, Directorate of Supply,Deputy Chief of Staff for Installations and Logistics,HQ USAF. She was recently selected to replaceMichael A. Aimone, who had served as The DeputyAir Force Civil Engineer since 1999 and is now theDeputy Director of Logistics Readiness, Deputy Chiefof Staff for Installations and Logistics, HQ USAF.

Ms. Ferguson began her Air Force career as adesign civil engineer at Plattsburgh Air Force Base,NY, in 1981. She transferred to Langley AFB, VA, twoyears later, where she held a variety of positions withthe 1st Fighter Wing, HQ Tactical Air Command andHQ Air Combat Command including chief, Engineer-ing Branch and chief, Contract and EnvironmentalPlanning Section with the 1st Civil EngineeringSquadron, and chief, Military Construction ProgramsBranch, at HQ TAC. At HQ ACC she was deputy

chief of the Programs Division.Moving to the Pentagon in 1994, she worked in several positions in the

environmental and civil engineering programareas. Ms. Ferguson became chief of the Installa-

New Deputy Civil Engineer On Boardtion Support Panel with the Office ofthe Deputy Chief of Staff for Installa-tions and Logistics when the AirForce corporate structure stood up in1995. In 1997 she moved to HQU.S. Air Forces in Europe, RamsteinAir Base, Germany, to serve as chief,Programs and Resources Division,for the Civil Engineer Directorate.She returned to the Pentagon in 1999as chief, Installation Support Paneland chief, Civil Engineer Programsand Analysis Branch, with the Officeof The Civil Engineer.

A 1989 graduate of Air Com-mand and Staff College at MaxwellAFB, AL, Ms. Ferguson holds aBachelor of Science degree in civilengineering from the University ofNew Hampshire and a Master�sdegree in public administration fromAuburn University. She is a registeredprofessional engineer in the state ofVirginia.

Kathleen I. Ferguson

James R. Pennino is thefirst to hold the new SeniorExecutive Service positioncreated in the Office of theCommand Civil Engineer atHeadquarters Air ForceMateriel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH.Formerly an active duty slot,the Deputy Command CivilEngineer position at AFMC isnow an SES position, bringingto four the number of SES slotsavailable in the Air Force civilengineer career field.

Mr. Pennino comes toAFMC from the Air ForceCenter for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE),where he was the director of the WesternRegion Environmental Office, working in SanFrancisco, CA. He began his Air Force careerin 1966, spending four years as an active dutycivil engineering officer with assignments inthe United States and overseas, including onewith the 557th RED HORSE Squadron,Kwang Ju, Korea. He entered civil service in1972 as a facility project programmer for HQU.S. Air Forces in Europe, specializing inlong-range facility planning and programming

Proud Father

Civil Engineering Gains New SES Position

James R. Pennino

until his voluntarydeparture fromfederal service in1984, when he leftto start his ownconstruction-related business.Mr. Penninoreturned to federalservice in 1997,serving as chief,Programs Devel-opment andFinancial Manage-ment Branch, HQPacific Air Forces,Hickam AFB, HI,

before joining AFCEE in 1999.The AFMC position is the only

civil engineer SES slot located at amajor command. The other threepositions are: The Deputy CivilEngineer, HQ U.S. Air Force,Washington DC; Director, AFCEE,Brooks AFB, TX; and Director, AirForce Base Conversion Agency,Arlington, VA.

CMSgt Julio C. Morelos Jr. pinsthe Air Force civil engineer badge onhis son, Airman Julio C. Morelos III,during the Joint Engineer AssistantCourse graduation ceremony Nov. 6at Ft. Leonard Wood, MO. The chiefwas the guest speaker at the gradua-tion. Chief Morelos is an IndividualMobilization Augmentee assigned tothe Air Force Civil Engineer SupportAgency, Tyndall AFB, FL. He is theagency�s explosive ordnance disposal;nuclear, biological and chemical; andIMA program manager. AirmanMorelos is an Engineer Assistant whois now at his first duty assignment atOsan Air Base, Republic of Korea.(courtesy photo)

28 SPRING 2002


The following Air Force civil engineer officers were recently selected for promotion to therank of colonel. Congratulations to all on their leadership and achievement.

2001 Colonel-Selects

Jared A. AstinDavid C. Brewer

* Theresa C. CarterWilliam M. CorsonCarlos R. Cruz-GonzalezMichael Falino*BPZ (below the promotion zone)

Otis L. Hicks, Jr.Irvin B. LeeMarshall K. Lounsberry III

* Neal B. McElhannon* Kevin E. Rumsey

* Thomas J. SchluckebierKeith E. SmithJoyce F. SohotraDouglas K. TuckerMark D. Wright

Congratulations to the following Air Force civil engineer officers on being selected forpromotion to lieutenant colonel.

2001 Lieutenant Colonel-Selects

Brent AdamsPeter C. BahmDavid J. CrowDavid F. DeMartinoJohn P. DewineRichard M. DoranKraig A. Evenson

* Patrick F. FogartyMarjorie A. Fuller

Thomas L. GlardonScott A. HartfordBilly J. C. IrwinDimasalang F. JunioAlexander P. KaribianDavid R. LehositDavid H. Maharrey Jr.Keith H. MaxwellChristopher C. McLane

Deborah A. McMurtreyPatrick C. Morris

* Salman M. NodjomianMarc L. PincinceMarvin W. Smith Jr.Jeffery A. VingerBenjamin Wham IIAlan J. WiederCalvin Williams

Congratulations to the following Air Force civil engineer non-commissioned officers onbeing selected for promotion to senior master sergeant.

2001 Senior Master Sergeant-Selects

Fernando A. AdamsLouis F. AlimondaKimberley R. AllenClark M. AndreanDennis P. AskinMatthew BernhardtGregory E. BrownRonald A. BrownGeorge E. BuntingDennis W. CarsonMichael CavalieroUwe W. ChadwickSomanita ChotkowskiJoseph M. ClabaughDavid D. DanielMichael J. DimickRandy J. DollingerJames D. DonnettJacob P. E. DunbarKevin J. Eide

Brian E. EllisThomas E. GilpinNor B. GomezTodd A. GumprechtJay M. HammondWilliam M. HancockJerry J. HanesDenny J. HeitmanRichard N. HeldCraig E. HenryJohn S. HimmelCraig N. HjulerCarroll W. HolcombeHarold W. HollisPaul T. Humphrey Jr.Paul J. JohnsonDavid A. JonesWilliam N. KendallFrancis B. LagatFrancis E. Larkin III

Jerry W. Lewis Jr.Miguel A. LeyArmando LuceroDavid E. MartinKevin W. MatlockRobert G. McCartySidney R. McNeilJohn E. McQueen Jr.James J. MedeirosMichael A. MillerBrian A. NaragonTroy D. OddenThomas A. PachniakPaul R. PladsonEdward M. PolokaMichael P. RamseyJimmy A. RicheyRichard J. RobinsonPaul D. RossJames A. Route Jr.

Jimmie Sampson Jr.Francisco A. SandovalOscar L. San LuisDanny W. SatterleeRichard B. SheridanGarland W. SmithMorgan S. SpruillWilliam B. StaplesGerrodd StevensonLouis D. SuarezJoseph TarroGary A. TempleDaryl J. VanCiseMichael D. WaltersWilliam T. Walton IIIKathleen M. WerlebushnellDouglas L. WilsonAnthony G. WoodEric E. Yocam

*BPZ

30 SPRING 2002

An Air Force electrician was the first RED HORSEengineer to graduate from Army Airborne School in aceremony March 28 at Ft. Benning, GA.

TSgt Joel Moore went through parachute trainingas part of an initiative to create an air-deliverablecontingency response group at Moody Air ForceBase, GA. The idea is for a team from the group,including engineers, communicators, securityforces and others, to be delivered by helicopteror parachute to a damaged or bare airfield.They will secure it, make the necessary repairsand get it ready for the Air Force�s cargo aircraftto deliver more people and equipment.

Having a team ready to drop in and createa functional air base �will provide the Air Forcemore options in selecting future operationallocations,� said Brig Gen Pat Burns, the AirCombat Command Civil Engineer.

As a member of the 819th RED HORSESquadron at Malmstrom AFB, MT, Moore will be

RED HORSE Engineer Goes Airborne

Gary M. Erickson, Director ofthe Air Force Center for Environmen-tal Excellence, was recently honoredas a Meritorious Executive byPresident George W. Bush.

Mr. Erickson was among 12 AirForce civilians to receive either aDistinguished or Meritorious Execu-tive award from the president. Thechief executive confers these rankseach year on a select group of careerSES civilians for their exceptionalservice to the American people andlong-term achievements.

The Meritorious Executive rankis conferred on leaders for theirsustained accomplishments. Only 5percent of the SES corps receives thisaward annually. In announcing theawards, President Bush said that in

AFCEE Director Earns Presidential Honoraddition to exceptional performance,the honorees also have in common�an outstanding work ethic, commit-ment to public service and pride in ajob well done.�

�It�s a significant award,� saidErickson. �I have watched other SESmembers that I�ve admired over theyears be selected and honored thisway, so it�s a little humbling to haveone of those awards sent your way.�

The director was quick to givecredit for his selection to the AFCEEstaff. �My hat�s off to them,� he said.�They�re the ones who did the hardwork and made it all possible. It�s adouble enjoyment for me personallyto receive the award and also be partof a team that produces a recognitionlike this.�

on-call to deploy with Moody�s 820th ContingencyResponse Group. He is the first of 138 RED HORSEmembers the Air Force plans to send to airborne training.

Army Airborne School is a three-week coursewhere students learn to parachute from an aircraft

safely. The students make five parachute jumps,including two in combat gear.

For graduation, Moore jumped out of aC-130 into the drop zone where the ceremonywas being held. After landing, he mingled withthe crowd before forming up with his fellowstudents to receive his jump wings.

�Jumping into graduation was great,�Moore said.

In the end, Moore said, he learned how tosuccessfully exit an aircraft, flip away from other

paratroopers and land without breaking his legs.�Just keep your feet and knees together and your

eyes on the horizon and you�ll be all right.�(2Lt Kevin S. Brown, ACC Public Affairs)

Gary M. Erickson

Mr. Erickson has been thedirector of AFCEE since 1996.(Gil Dominguez, AFCEE Public Affairs)

SMSgt Robert Simpson is the Air Force recipi-ent of the 2001 GEICO Military Service Award forhis work in fire safety and fire prevention.

Sergeant Simpson, a firefighter with the 9thCivil Engineer Squadron at Beale Air Force Base,CA, was honored by the Government EmployeeInsurance Company for his contributions to both themilitary and civilian communities. He initiatedBeale�s first joint wildland fire training program andcoordinated the construction of 35 miles of firebreaks to protect the base�s mission-essentialfacilities. In addition to his regular duties, he spends

Beale Firefighter Wins GEICO Award

SMSgt Robert Simpson

numerous hours providing trainingand assistance to local firefightingorganizations.

The Military Service Awardprogram annually recognizes the on-and off-duty contributions of onemember from each military servicebranch. Award recipients receive aplaque and a $2,500 honorarium.(Air Combat Command News Serviceand GEICO Direct)


MSgt Mike Reed from EielsonAir Force Base, AK, didn�t let beingdeployed to a remote desert environ-ment keep him from showing someCE creativity and can-do ability inthe field.

After the September 11th attackon America, he was deployed to abare base location in Southwest Asia.There he used his off-duty time andwoodworking talents to incorporatethe U.S. flag into the wingcommander�s podium. The com-mander requested it be ready in time

A Patriotic Podiumfor the first Commander�s Call,which was in five days.

�Anyone can build a podium,�said Sergeant Reed. �I wanted tobuild one people would be proud tostand behind.�

Sergeant Reed said he made thepodium from scrap pieces of ma-hogany. Even the stars are made ofwood.

�We cut the wood for the starsdown to 1/16 of an inch, glued on apaper template, then cut them outwith scissors and glued them intoposition on the box,� said SergeantReed. �I used the front and back ofthe mahogany to form the stripes;one side was white and the other waskind of reddish.�

I wanted to build one people would be proud to stand behind.�AIR FORCE CIVIL ENGINEER 31

For the blue field he selected apiece that had been left in the sunand had just the right distinction toshow off the white stars. �It alsomade for a good contrast from thered and white stripes,� he said. �Iput on about eight coats of aircraftlacquer, given to me by a Britishfriend. It sealed up nicely and cameout better than expected � too muchsand and dust for the perfect finish.�

Several visiting DVs have usedSergeant Reed�s podium, includingArmy Gen Tommy Franks, Com-mander, U.S. Central Command;Secretary of the Air Force Dr. JamesG. Roche; and the Vice Commander-in-Chief, Vice President DickCheney. (Letha Cozart, editor)

�Anyone can build a podium . . .

Care Packages Send A Taste of HomeMSgt CharlesWoske, 90thCES firstsergeant,labels apackage ofcookies fordeployedtroops. (Photoby ElizabethMcClain,90th CES)

Civil engineers at F.E. WarrenAir Force Base, WY, are ensuringtheir deployed co-workers get a tasteof home.

Members of the 90th CivilEngineer Squadron prepared 25 carepackages with baked goods, maga-zines and books, and personal careitems in March for shipment to anundisclosed location overseas.

Rhonda Frederici, 90th CESOperations Flight, organized theproject after she learned from peoplewho were deployed how much anypackage, especially those withcookies, meant to them. Morepackages are headed for the deployedpersonnel around the Fourth of July,she said. (Air Force Space CommandNews Service)

Standing at podium,from left: MSgt MikeReed, SecretaryRoche, and VicePresident Cheney

32 SPRING 2002

Lt Gen Michael E. Zettler, Deputy Chief of Staff for Installations and Logistics,Headquarters U.S. Air Force, has announced the recipients of the 2001 Air Force CivilEngineer Awards. The awards were presented Feb. 20, during National Engineers Week,at the 40th annual Civil Engineer Awards Luncheon, Bolling Air Force Base, WashingtonDC. The Balchen/Post winner was recognized at the 36th Annual International AviationSnow Symposium Awards Luncheon May 1. Following are the winners (in bold) andrunners-up. (Poster, left, by Keith Fred)

Outstanding Civil EngineerUnit Award andThe Society of American MilitaryEngineers Curtin AwardLarge Unit437 CES, Charleston AFB, SC(AMC)49 CES, Holloman AFB, NM (ACC)

Small Unit31 CES, Aviano AB, Italy (USAFE)314 CES, Little Rock AFB, AR(AETC)

Brigadier General Michael A.McAuliffe Award(Housing Flight)9 CES, Beale AFB, CA (ACC)31 CES, Aviano AB, Italy (USAFE)

Major General Robert C.Thompson Award(Resources Flight)36 CES, Andersen AFB, Guam(PACAF)325 CES, Tyndall AFB, FL (AETC)

Brigadier General Archie S.Mayes Award(Engineering Flight)100 CES, RAF Mildenhall, UK(USAFE)7 CES, Dyess AFB, TX (ACC)

Major General Clifton D.Wright Award(Operations Flight)52 CES, Spangdahlem AB,Germany (USAFE)3 CES, Elmendorf AFB, AK(PACAF)

Chief Master Sergeant Ralph E.Sanborn Award(Fire Protection Flight)56 CES, Luke AFB, AZ (AETC)18 CES, Kadena AB, Japan(PACAF)

Senior Master Sergeant Gerald J.Stryzak Award(Explosive Ordnance DisposalFlight)775 CES, Hill AFB, UT (AFMC)39 CES, Incirlik AB, Turkey(USAFE)

Colonel Frederick J.Riemer Award(Readiness Flight)51 CES, Osan AB, ROK (PACAF)305 CES, McGuire AFB, NJ (AMC)

Outstanding Civil EngineerEnvironmental Flight Award319 CES, Grand Forks AFB, ND(AMC)30 CES, Vandenberg AFB, CA(AFSPC)

The Society of American MilitaryEngineers Newman MedalLt Col Thomas D. Quasney,48 CES, RAF Lakenheath, UK(USAFE)Col Cornelius J. Carmody, HQAFSPC, Peterson AFB, CO(AFSPC)

The Society of American MilitaryEngineers Sverdrup MedalMaj Roy-Alan Agustin,HQ USAF, Washington DC (USAF)

The Society of American MilitaryEngineers Goethals MedalRobert M. Moore, GS-15,HQ USAF, Washington DC (USAF)

The Society of American MilitaryEngineers Goddard MedalActive DutySMSgt Roger L. Austin, 31 CES,Aviano AB, Italy (USAFE)SMSgt William E. Ferenc, 8 CES,Kunsan AB, ROK (PACAF)

Air Force ReserveMSgt David S. Nickel, 916 CES,Seymour Johnson AFB, NC(AFRC)

Major General Joseph A. AhearnEnlisted Leadership AwardCMSgt Carla F. Sharman, 437 CES,Charleston AFB, SC (AMC)CMSgt Anthony M. Rabonza,18 CES, Kadena AB, Japan (PACAF)

Mr. Harry P. Rietman Award(Senior Civilian Manager)Richard A. Pinto, GS-14, HQUSAF, Washington DC (USAF)George G. Robins, WS-16, 45 CES,Patrick AFB, FL (AFSPC)

Major General Augustus M.Minton Award(Outstanding Air Force CivilEngineer magazine article)Col David S. Zelenok, 50 SW,Schriever AFB, CO (AFSPC)MSgt Ronald A. Brown, 35 CES,Misawa AB, Japan (PACAF)


CMSgt (ret) Larry R. Daniels

Major General William D.Gilbert AwardOfficerCapt Eric S. Turner, HQ USAFE,Ramstein AB, Germany (USAFE)Lt Col Patrick E. Ryan, HQ AMC,Scott AFB, IL (AMC)

EnlistedSMSgt Todd W. Barnes, HQ AMC,Scott AFB, IL (AMC)SMSgt Paul L. Hicks, HQ AFMC,Wright-Patterson AFB, OH (AFMC)

CivilianKarl-Willi Ningelgen, C-SSS-10,HQ USAFE, Ramstein AB,Germany (USAFE)John S. Busca, GS-13, HQ AETC,Randolph AFB, TX (AETC)

Major General Eugene A.Lupia AwardMilitary ManagerCapt Dwight F. Junio, 52 CES,Spangdahlem AB, Germany(USAFE)Capt Stephen T. Grace, 607 MMS,Osan AB, ROK (PACAF)

Military TechnicianTSgt Brian C. Kurtz, 1 CCS,Ramstein AB, Germany (USAFE)TSgt Craig S. Hall, 510 CES,USAFA, CO (USAFA)

Outstanding Civil EngineerSenior Military ManagerLt Col Robert E. Moriarty, 75 CES,Hill AFB, UT (AFMC)Maj Deborah A. McMurtrey, 49 CES,Holloman AFB, NM (ACC)

Outstanding Civil EngineerMilitary SuperintendentSMSgt Edward J. Rosemeier III,48 CES, RAF Lakenheath, UK(USAFE)MSgt David M. Fain, 56 CES, LukeAFB, AZ (AETC)

Outstanding Civil EngineerCivilian ManagerGloria Y. Swen, GS-9, OL-EAFCESA/CEMIRT, Travis AFB, CA(AFCESA)Richard Ramirez, WS-10, 95 CES,Edwards AFB, CA (AFMC)

Outstanding Civil EngineerCivilian SupervisorJohn L. Cooper, WS-8, 796 CES,Eglin AFB, FL (AFMC)Stanley L. Beard, GS-7, 62 CES,McChord AFB, WA (AMC)

Outstanding Civil EngineerCivilian TechnicianKenneth S. Feaster, WG-11, OL-AAFCESA/CEMIRT, Dover AFB, DE(AFCESA)Jerome T. Cook, WG-10, 50 CES,Schriever AFB, CO (AFSPC)

Outstanding Civil EngineerIndividual MobilizationAugmenteeOfficer ManagerMaj Eric S. Tillstrom, 2 CES,Barksdale AFB, LA (ACC)Col Paula J. Loomis, HQ USAF,Washington DC (USAF)

Enlisted ManagerMSgt Gale Benton, 56 CES,Luke AFB, AZ (AETC)CMSgt Julio C. Morelos, Jr.,HQ AFCESA, Tyndall AFB, FL(AFCESA)

Balchen/Post Award(Snow and Ice Removal)28 CES, Ellsworth AFB, SD (ACC)52 CES, Spangdahlem AB,Germany (USAFE)

2002 Air Force National Societyof Professional EngineersFederal Engineer of the YearAwardMilitaryCapt William H. Kale, 819 RHS,Malmstrom AFB, MT (ACC)

CivilianMichael J. Santoro, GS-14,HQ AFCESA, Tyndall AFB, FL(AFCESA)

The Air Force civil engineer community hashonored the first person to hold the position ofChief, Enlisted Matters by renaming one of thehighest annual NCO awards after him.

The Outstanding Air Force Civil EngineerMilitary Superintendent Award is now the CMSgtLarry R. Daniels Award. Daniels was the careerfield�s chief of enlisted matters from 1989 to 1992.

�This is byfar the highesthonor everbestowed uponme,� Danielssaid. �It isespecially mean-ingful to have myname associatedwith the topsenior NCO eachyear.�

The positionwas created in1989 by GeneralJoseph �Bud�Ahearn, The AirForce CivilEngineer at the time. Ahearn became familiar withDaniels while both were stationed at HQ UnitedStates Air Forces in Europe in the mid 1980s.

Daniels entered the Air Force in 1966. His firstassignment was as a carpenter at Travis AFB, CA,followed by a one-year tour with the 820th REDHORSE Squadron in Vietnam. Following a tour atRhein Main AB, Germany, he spent five years atLuke AFB, AZ, where he retrained to become a�Triple Nickel� (programs and work control techni-cian). From 1978 to 1987, he served at threedifferent locations in England and at Ramstein. In1987 he transferred to the Air Force Engineeringand Services Center at Tyndall AFB, FL (precursorto the Air Force Civil Engineer Support Agency) andmoved to Washington DC when tapped for the chiefof enlisted matters position two years later.

Daniels said the proudest achievement for himduring his three-year tenure in the position wasworking with the Tri-Service Housing SteeringGroup and DoD to help single airmen living indormitories have private rooms. �It was the firstlarge step toward the quality of life standards that arestill improving to this day,� he said.

Daniels retired in 1992 and currently lives inPeoria, AZ, with his wife Dottie. He will helppresent the award bearing his name during the CivilEngineer Annual Awards Banquet in February 2003.(Lois Walker, AFCESA Historian)

Military SuperintendentAward renamed


34 SPRING 2002

Natural Resources Conservation(Individual/Team)Natural Resources Conservation Team,45th Space Wing,Patrick AFB, FL (AFSPC)

Environmental Quality(Non-Industrial Installation)Air Armament Center,Eglin AFB, FL (AFMC)

Pollution Prevention(Industrial Installation)Warner Robins Air Logistics Center,Robins AFB, GA (AFMC)

2001 Air Force and Secretary of Defense Environmental Award WinnersSeveral Air Force personnel have recently been recognized for their contributions and commitment to the service�s

environmental programs. The Air Force Chief of Staff announced the winners of the 2001 General Thomas D. WhiteEnvironmental Awards in December. The Air Force winners then went on to compete in corresponding categories for the 2001Secretary of Defense Environmental Security Awards, where they claimed five of the 10 awards annually given.

�These awards give us a measuring stick for where our environmental programs are within the Department of Defense, andhow well we�re adhering to DoD directives that are based on public law,� said Col Jim Holland, chief, Environmental Division,Office of The Air Force Civil Engineer.

The Air Force has adopted a �green� attitude over the past several years, Holland said. �One of our main goals is to be agood neighbor,� he said. �Environmental issues are not only those within the base fence, but outside the base as well.�

Following are this year�s award categories, winners and honorable mentions, and their major commands. (Compiled fromnews releases by Gil Dominguez, Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence Public Affairs and MSgt Ron Tull, Air Force Print News)

2001 General Thomas D. WhiteEnvironmental AwardsEnvironmental Quality Award(Non-Industrial)Eglin AFB, FL (AFMC)Reserve Component181st Fighter Wing, Terre Haute, IN (ANG)Honorable mentionGrissom ARB, IN (AFRC)

Environmental Quality Award forIndividual/Team ExcellenceJoan Albury,Patrick AFB, FL (AFSPC)Honorable MentionRamstein AB, Germany (USAFE)

Natural ResourcesConservation Award(Small Base)Fairchild AFB, WA (AMC)Honorable MentionRobins AFB, GA (AFMC)

Natural Resources Conservation Awardfor Individual/Team ExcellencePatrick AFB, FL (AFSPC)

Cultural Resources Management Award(All Installations)Eglin AFB, FL (AFMC)

Restoration Award (All Installations)F.E. Warren AFB, WY (AFSPC)Honorable MentionTravis AFB, CA (AMC)

Restoration Awardfor Individual/Team ExcellenceBeatrice Kephart,Vandenberg AFB, CA (AFSPC)Honorable MentionMichael O’Brien, Beale AFB, CA (ACC)

Pollution Prevention Award(Industrial)Robins AFB, GA (AFMC)

Pollution Prevention AcquisitionIndividual/Team AwardPatrick AFB, FL (AFSPC)

2001 Secretary of Defense Environmental Security AwardsEnvironmental Restoration(Installation)F.E. Warren AFB, WY (AFSPC)

Environmental Restoration(Individual/Team)Beatrice Kephart,Vandenberg AFB, CA (AFSPC)

34 SPRING 2002

AIR FORCE CIVIL ENGINEER 35AIR FORCE CIVIL ENGINEER 35

Unique RUnique RUnique RUnique RUnique Requirements:equirements:equirements:equirements:equirements: Provides engineering support for the largest base in AirCombat Command supporting the F-117A Stealth Fighter mission, German Air ForceTornado and F-4 training, Bare Base and the 46th Test Group with associated high-speed test track.

The 49th CES manages over $115M in facility projects with an annual operatingbudget of $25M. Holloman AFB is a 59,639-acre complex that includes 7.4M squarefeet of buildings, 1,440 housing units, 206 miles of roads, a 90-mile Bonito waterpipeline, 15 off-base water wells supplying the Holloman/Alamogordo communities,three active runways, 11 taxiways and three parking ramps. CE also supports NASAspace shuttle missions by training and leading Holloman�s 90-man Space ShuttleContingency Response Force (SCRF). The SCRF coordinates with 68 on- and off-baseagencies to prepare for the Shuttle at the primary back-up landing site.

The unit recently accomplished an expedient recovery of a QF-4 drone thatcrashed on Holloman�s only heavy aircraft runway. CE led the Disaster Control Group,secured the crash site, surveyed runway damage and aircraft debris, and assisted theAircraft Crash Recovery Team with documentation, cleanup and removal. Virtuallyovernight they harnessed a local contractor to repair approximately 2,000 feet ofrunway in three days. The runway was operational five days after the crash � an ACCrecord. Reopening the runway was especially critical due to Holloman�s vital role inproviding bare base equipment and personnel to Operation ENDURING FREEDOM.

Innovations:Innovations:Innovations:Innovations:Innovations: Holloman is standing up a GeoBase Team, operationalizing GlobalPositioning System equipment and Geographic Information System software tomanage facilities and infrastructure. After the QF-4 crash, GeoBase tools and skillscompressed the accident survey from 24 hours with traditional methods to 6 hours.CE also utilized the Fast Payback Capital Investment Program to purchase a pavingmachine, saving $8M in life-cycle cost. The first completed project already metpayback requirements.

Community Involvement:Community Involvement:Community Involvement:Community Involvement:Community Involvement: The Horizontal Repair section partnered with theAlamogordo School District to construct a 400-meter oval running track andfootball/soccer complex. This self-help project saved the school district over$225,000 in construction costs. The squadron also participated in several key rolesin the largest natural disaster drill in state history.

Recent Accomplishments:Recent Accomplishments:Recent Accomplishments:Recent Accomplishments:Recent Accomplishments: Awards include the 2001 Air Force Outstanding CivilEngineer Squadron, Large Unit Runner-up award; the 2001 Air Combat CommandOutstanding Civil Engineer Squadron, Large Unit award; the Air Combat CommandOutstanding Readiness Flight award; the National 2000 Partners In Flight Award,Stewardship category (first and only DoD organization to receive this prestigiousaward); and the National Registry of Environmental Professionals� EnvironmentalExcellence Award, 2001.

Parent Unit:Parent Unit:Parent Unit:Parent Unit:Parent Unit:49th Fighter Wing(Air Combat Command)

Locat ion:Locat ion:Locat ion:Locat ion:Locat ion:Holloman Air Force Base, NM

Commander:Commander:Commander:Commander:Commander:Lt Col Edward Piekarczyk

Assigned Personnel:Assigned Personnel:Assigned Personnel:Assigned Personnel:Assigned Personnel:284 military, 192 civilians and54 contractors

Mission:Mission:Mission:Mission:Mission:Provide combat-readyengineers for worldwidedeployments and provideprograms, design,construction, maintenance,fire protection, explosivesdisposal and environmentalsupport for 7.4M square feetof buildings and $2.6B ofinfrastructure supportingF-117A and Foreign MilitarySales pilot training for the49th FW and 26 associate unitsfrom 14 different commands.

Mottos:Mottos:Mottos:Mottos:Mottos:Engineers Lead the Way!Mess with the Bull �Get the Horns!

36 SPRING 2002

(Above) SSgt Dennis Rellins and SSgt Linwood Stull, bothfrom the 27th CES, construct a holding facility for fuel.(Photos by Lt Col Nick Desport)

Members of the 27th CivilEngineer Squadron, Cannon AirForce Base, NM, deployed toSouthwest Asia in September tocreate a base capable of supportingthe KC-135s that would refuelaircraft participating in OperationENDURING FREEDOM.

As part of the 319th Air Expeditionary Group Support Squadron, deployed 27th CESmembers helped put up 165 tents, 35 hardened facilities and a dining hall that sat 400people and served 4,000 meals a day. They built a 5.2-megawatt power plant, a waterstorage farm that provided more than 160,000 gallons of water and a fuel farm holdingmore than 1 million gallons � making it possible to provide aerial refueling to fightersand bombers flying into Afghanistan. (Air Combat Command News Service)

(Above) A1C Brady Dryden, 27th CES, dumps sand around a new waterline that will tie the water plant to the dining hall at his deployed location.

new af civil engineer magazine, spring 2002 · 2016. 8. 26. · 4 spring 2002 interview during the...

Documents