Our recent experience re-emphasizes that America expects us to take care of our injured and wounded in a quality environment, in facilities that are healthy and clean. I assure you that the AirForce is meeting that expectation. All 75 AirForce medical treatment facilities are regularly inspected (both scheduled and unannounced) by two nationally recognized inspection and accreditation organizations. The Joint Commission inspects and accredits our AirForce medical centers and hospitals, while the Accreditation Association for Ambulatory Health Care inspects and accredits our outpatient clinics. These inspections focus on the critical areas of quality of patient care, patient safety, and the environment of care. All AirForce medical facilities have passed inspection and are currently fully accredited.
126.96.36.199. At a minimum, any data transmitted by commercial wireless devices, services, and technologies will implement data encryption from end to end over an assured channel (AC) (see clarification in Note below) and shall be validated under the Cryptographic Module Validation Program as meeting requirements, per Federal Information Processing Standards Publication (FIPS PUB) 140-2, Security Requirements for Cryptographic Modules, Overall Level 1 or Level 2, as dictated by the sensitivity of the data. Historically, ICS devices were not designed with encryption capabilities. In cases where commercial wireless must be employed but the ICS device(s) cannot provide FIPS PUB 140-2 encryption capabilities, the architecture must be carefully designed to provide an AC and additional defense-in-depth risk mitigation strategies to complement the IA controls to achieve an adequate level of security. The minimum acceptable cryptographic standard is the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) using a cryptographic key length of 128 bits as outlined in FIPS PUB 197, Advanced Encryption Standard (AES).
ISSUING AND DISTRIBUTING OPERATING BUDGET AUTHORITY (OBA) 3.1. Overview. Apply this chapter in distributing Military Personnel (MILPERS) and Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Appropriation fund authorities. Refer to AFI 65-601, Volume 1, Budget Guidance and Procedures, for other appropriations. See AFPD 65-6 for AirForce policy on providing optimum funding flexibility at all levels and controlling OBA amounts so they don't exceed the authority received by the issuing activity. When issuing OBA, SAF/FMB and subordinate levels will identify restrictions imposed by the legislative and executive branches of the government and by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). Subordinate activities must ensure that the OBAs issued are consistent with the budget authority received with regard to funding classifications and limitations.
governmental) that conducts intelligence activities to acquire U.S. information, block or impair U.S. intelligence collection, influence U.S. policy, or disrupt U.S. systems and programs. This term includes a foreign intelligence and security service and international terrorist organizations. MDCO. Elements of the Military Departments authorized to conduct CI investigations, i.e., Army CI, Naval Criminal Investigative Service, and the AirForce Office of Special
Unaccompanied Personnel Housing Services (UPH): Manages execution of government owned, leased, contracted, or privatized UPH. Functional categories include: Unaccompanied Personnel Housing including Permanent Party UPH management services, initial issue of furnishings (furniture, appliances, and equipment) for newly constructed and renovated facilities, and management of replacement furnishings (repair, replace, control, moving and handling, inventory, warehousing and disposal). Child and Youth Programs: Assists Department of Defense (DoD) military and civilian personnel in balancing the competing demands of family life and the
Improves Departmental Management and Seeks Efficiencies. Secretary Gates is mak- ing broad changes to how DOD is managed up and down the organization, from the individual Services to the Office of the Secretary. Altogeth- er, he has proposed changes that will produce net savings of $78 billion over the course of five years. These improvements focus on creating a more streamlined, agile and effective organization and on freeing up resources currently tied up with ac- tivities that are low priorities or even relics from how the U.S. military was organized during the Cold War. Up to $100 billion in efficiency sav- ings will then be reinvested in higher priorities within DOD. Examples of these efficiency initia- tives include the Air Force’s consolidating two air operations centers in the United States and two in Europe, the Army’s avoiding $1.4 billion in military construction costs by sustaining existing facilities, and the Navy’s saving more than $1.3 billion by using multi-year procurement strate- gies to buy new surveillance, jamming, and fight- er aircraft. DOD is making itself into a leaner organization by slimming down upper manage- ment, for example by dis-establishing the head- quarters of the Second Fleet in Norfolk, Virginia, which had distinct responsibilities during the Cold War but which currently has training and mission responsibilities that will be transferred to a different part of the Navy. DOD is further promoting a leaner organization by trimming the number of Generals and Admirals by more than 100 positions out of the roughly 900 currently on the books, and by eliminating or downgrading nearly 200 out of 1,400 senior civil servant posi- tions. While these personnel changes will result in only modest savings, they will contribute to a leaner, more effective DOD.
On July 22, 1997, the Department of the Treasury and the Department of Defense agreed that the submission of Federal Agencies’ Centralized Trial-Balance System (FACTS) data at the CFO reporting entity level provides for consistency and comparability between FACTS transmissions and CFO financial statements by requiring the DFAS to: (1) establish procedures to ensure that FACTS reporting and CFO financial statements are derived from a single data base; and (2) where data elements are used to derive general ledger account balances, establish documented crosswalks to provide a consistent audit trail. The Department of Defense reporting entities for FY 1997 are the Departments of the Army, Navy and the AirForce; the Army, Navy, AirForce and Defense Agency Working Capital Funds; the DoD
188.8.131.52. AirForce Medical Logistics Office/Engineering, Facilities, Equipment & Procurement Branch (AFMLO/FOM) provides Planning, Programming, and Budgetary guidance, direction and oversight as required to the MAJCOMs for using appropriated funds for medical SRM projects. 1.3. Scope. This instruction provides general procedures for planning, programming, and executing O&M-funded projects for real property classified as maintenance, repair or unspecified minor military construction. It applies to all projects, including, but not limited to, those planned for accomplishment by organic forces (which include overhires and temporary duty augmentees), troop labor, or contract (includ- ing Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineer Requirements (SABER)). This instruction addresses only O&M-funded unspecified minor military construction, facilities for operational requirements, and main- tenance and repair projects for real property. These funds are normally in the 3400 appropriation (3740 for AFRC and 3840 for ANG), but may include 3600, Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E); Working Capital Fund (WCF); or Defense SRM accounts when made available for O&M pur- poses. See AFI 32-1001, Operations Management, for guidance on functions at the installation level.
(c) The National Guard Bureau (NGB) is a joint activity of the Department of Defense. The Chief, NGB is a principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense, through the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on matters involving non-federalized National Guard forces, and other matters as determined by the Secretary of Defense. For NGB matters pertaining to the responsibilities of the Departments of the Army and AirForce in law or DoD policy, the Secretary of Defense normally exercises authority, direction, and control over the NGB through the Secretaries of the Army and the AirForce. The NGB is the focal point at the strategic level for National Guard matters that are not under the authority, direction, and control of the
1.3.1. Ensure maintenance personnel are provided the appropriate rest period and do not exceed maximum duty periods. (T-0). EXCEPTION: The Group Commander or equivalent may waive these provisions during actual advanced defense readiness conditions, actual emergencies as defined in DoD Directive 3150.2, DoD Nuclear Weapons Surety Program, AFPD 91-1, Nuclear Weapons and Systems Surety, and AFI 91-101, AirForce Nuclear Weapons Surety Program, or to resolve an unexpected event (e.g., disabled vehicle, alarm fault, hoist failure, weather). The maximum duty period cannot be waived solely to support exercises or inspections. Consider climatic conditions for local work/rest cycles during extreme temperatures.
We recommend that Commander, DGMC, validate if the planned medical billing system will prioritize delinquent medical service accounts and alert the clerks as to which accounts require follow up, review, research, and pursue collection on the delinquent accounts that remain open. In addition, the DGMC Commander should establish procedures to document the process of patient follow up. We recommend that Deputy Director for Business and Finance, AirForce Surgeon General, coordinate with the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) develop a plan to address the reimbursement problems that arise from Medicare and Non-North Atlantic Treaty Organization Coalition Forces and assess whether further action can be taken against delinquent MSAs. We also recommend that Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) coordinate with Department of Health and Human Services to develop a strategy to address the difficulties DGMC has encountered with receiving reimbursement for services provided to Medicare beneficiaries.
conventional global precision attack capabilities in the near-term, but we are adding R&D funds to accelerate development of enhanced long-range strike capabilities. Building upon insights developed during the QDR, the Secretary of Defense has ordered a follow-on study to determine what combination of Joint persistent surveillance, electronic warfare, and precision-attack capabilities will be best suited to support U.S. power projection operations over the next two to three decades. The study will examine both penetrating platforms and stand-off weapon options. As part of this assessment, the AirForce is reviewing options for fielding survivable, long-range surveillance and strike aircraft as part of a comprehensive, phased plan to modernize the bomber force. Additionally, the Navy and the AirForce are cooperatively assessing alternatives for a new Joint cruise missile. Finally, the Department of Defense also plans to analyze conventional prompt global strike prototypes and will assess the effects that these systems, if deployed, might have on strategic stability.
First, it is appropriate to identify who and what makes up the United States IC. The US IC is composed of 16 separate government elements, or agencies. Every agency has a charter to collect intelligence or conduct intelligence activities, including the production and dissemination of intelligence, in support of US objectives. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) leads the IC. The IC has one independent agency, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The Department of Defense (DoD) contributes eight agencies, including AirForce, Army, Navy and Marine Corps Intelligence, the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), and the National Security Agency (NSA).
defense business system. An information system, other than a national security system, operated by, for, or on behalf of the DoD, including financial systems, mixed systems, financial data feeder systems, and IT and cybersecurity (formerly IA) infrastructure, used to support business activities, such as acquisition, financial management, logistics, strategic planning and budgeting, installations and environment, and human resource management.
(1) Acquisition, requirements, and budgeting, are closely related and must operate simultaneously with full cooperation and in close coordination. Validated “Capability Requirements” provide the basis for defining the products that will be acquired through the acquisition system and the budgeting process determines Department priorities and resource allocations and provides the funds necessary to execute planned programs. Throughout a product’s life cycle, adjustments may have to be made to keep the three processes aligned. Capability requirements may have to be adjusted to conform to technical and fiscal reality. Acquisition programs may have to adjust to changing requirements and funding availability. Budgeted funds may have to be adjusted to make programs executable or to adapt to evolving validated capability requirements and priorities. Stable capability requirements and funding are important to successful program execution. Those responsible for the three processes at the DoD level and within the DoD Components must work closely together to adapt to changing
General Information. The Ancient Order of Saint Barbara is the more distinguished of the two levels of awards. It recognizes those AirDefense Artillery Association Members who stand above their peers in the Honorable Order. The general criteria for accession into the Ancient Order are to have made extraordinary contributions through long-term service for, or on behalf of, the United States Army AirDefense Artillery branch. The Ancient order is reserved for those ADAA members whose careers have embodied the spirit, dignity, sense of sacrifice and commitment epitomized by Saint Barbara. Membership in the Honorable Order of Saint Barbara is a prerequisite for membership in the Ancient Order.
a. Reissues DoD Directive (DoDD) 7650.03 (Reference (a)) as a DoD instruction (DoDI) in accordance with the authority in DoDD 5106.01 (Reference (b)) to update established policy and assigned responsibilities for follow-up on the findings and recommendations of the GAO; the Inspector General of the Department of Defense (IG DoD); and other DoD internal audit organizations (referred to collectively in this instruction as “auditors”).
The goal of this primer is to identify key considerations for siting renewable energy projects that could impact the military mission, whether on or outside of military- managed lands. These considerations are intended as informational guidelines for developers and other participants in the renewable energy siting process. They also provide a basis for the further evolution of energy siting policy and the development of decision support tools, such as the Renewable Energy and Defense Geospatial Database (READ Database) that can help further this important dialogue. The READ Database, developed by NRDC in consultation with OSD, is a successful outcome of the collaboration and communication around these siting considerations to date. (More information on READ can be found on page 15 of this primer.)
h. Contractors should not be used to perform inherently governmental functions as outlined at subpart 7.5 of Reference (e); subpart 207.5 of the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (Reference (g)); section 2463 of Title 10, United States Code (U.S.C.) (Reference (h)); Office of Federal Procurement Policy Letter 11-01 (Reference (i)); and DoDI 1100.22 (Reference (j)). The reliance on contractors to perform functions that are critical or closely associated with inherently governmental functions will be limited and approved by exception only as outlined at subparts 7.503(d) and (e) of Reference (e).