volume 12 • no. 1 • 2004 - afcec home force civil engineer command focus air force special...

Building theARRKBuilding theARRK

Volume 12 • No. 1 • 2004

2 AIR FORCE CIVIL ENGINEER

photo by Keith Fred

From the Top

L. Dean FoxMajor General, USAFThe Air Force Civil Engineer

We recently recognized our Air Force Civil Engineer annual award winners. Asin previous years, picking the “best of the best” from our stable of thorough-breds is always a daunting task. I received a number of comments from ourCE “Founders” praising the program and the achievements of our awardwinners. My thanks to everyone for the outstanding nomination packages, thehard work by our awards committee, and to all the folks that made the recep-tion and luncheon one of the best we’ve ever had…well done!

Our Back To Bases (BTB) initiative continues to pick up steam. At our AnnualProgrammer’s Conference at Hill AFB, I met again with the MAJCOMEngineers to focus on the BTB team’s findings. I have appointed the Air StaffDivisions, HQ AFCESA, and HQ AFCEE as the OCRs for each of the BTBfindings and each MAJCOM has appointed a primary team member. Togetherwe will develop and implement solutions to each and every issue so that, asyour headquarters elements, we can better support the bases.

So why all this focus on bases? It’s pretty simple—what other services call“Public Works,” I consider one of our core competencies. The Army stressesmaneuver warfare and the Navy projects power from offshore, but ourtraditional fighting platform is the base. We emphasize the notion that Airmenestablish, open, operate, sustain, maintain and reconstitute our bases, and ourhome stations provide an ideal training platform for us to practice many ofour contingency skills. For example, what better way to learn how to install,maintain and sustain an airfield lighting system than to do that as part of yourprimary duties while at home station? The same holds true for the whole hostof tasks we engineers perform to support our great Air Force. While otherservices have moved toward a more centralized approach to installationmanagement, I believe this would detract from the training opportunities thatwe take advantage of every day at our installations, reducing our overallcombat effectiveness. So we will continue to emphasize the importance of ourbases to maintaining and sustaining our readiness posture.

Recently, I was very fortunate to travel to Southwest Asia and visit some ofour deployed engineers. I can’t begin to put into words the pride I felt seeingall of you in action, accomplishing the mission better than any other engineer-ing force in the world. To all our deployed troops I say, “Stay focused, get thejob done, remember those at home who are working to support you whileyou’re gone, and come home safe.”

Spring means more activity and I want to remind you all to keep safety in mindas you go about your job and recreational activities. I especially ask that ourmotorcycle enthusiasts heed General Jumper’s “Sight Picture” from 27 Feb 04regarding motorcycle safety and mentoring. Each and every one of you is avalued member of our family, and with safety at the forefront of our dailytasks, we can all enjoy the fun and fair weather ahead. As I continue my travelsthis spring, I look forward to seeing many of you in action.

Sallie and I wish you and your families continued health and happiness!

A Winning Season!

Air Force Civil Engineer is published quarterly as a

funded newspaper by the Professional Communi-

cations staff at the Air Force Civil Engineer Support

Agency, Tyndall AFB, Fla. 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,

Air Force Civil EngineerVolume 12 • Number 01 • 2004

The Civil EngineerMaj Gen L. Dean Fox

AFCESA CommanderCol Gus G. Elliott, Jr.

Chief, ProfessionalCommunicationsDr. Ronald Hartzer

Chief, Public AffairsMSgt Michael A. Ward

EditorTeresa Hood

Graphic DesignerGuy Ivie

the U.S. government, the Department of Defense 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

from AFCESA’s home page: http://www.afcesa.af.mil.

Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 3

CIVIL ENGINEERAir ForceAir ForceAir ForceAir ForceAir Force

Volume 12, No. 1, 2004

COMMAND FOCUS: Air Force Special Operations Command .................... 4

Building the ARRK ................................................................................................ 6MSgt Michael A. Ward

Force Development ............................................................................................. 9Lt Col Jon A. Roop

A New Understanding ..................................................................................... 11Msgt Michael A. Ward

Airborne RED HORSERigged, Ready and Red .............................................................................. 12

Maj Stephen D. Wood

RED HORSE Assault: Coming Soon to a Theater Near You ......... 14Capt Terry Vance

Engineers Take to the Air... Again ......................................................... 16Dr. Ronald B. Hartzer

Icy Crossing .......................................................................................................... 18MSgt Andrew Gates

FROM THE FRONT ........................................................................................................ 20

TECHNOLOGY .............................................................................................................. 22

CONSTRUCTION NOTES ............................................................................................... 25

CE WORLD ................................................................................................................. 28

TRAINING AND EDUCATION ......................................................................................... 34

Icy Crossing p. 18Icy Crossing p. 18

Building the ARRK p. 6Building the ARRK p. 6

Engineers Take to the Air p.16Engineers Take to the Air p.16

On the cover :During a demon-stration at ScottAFB, Ill., SSgtJoseph Wood, 16thCES, HurlburtField, Fla., unpacksone of the componentkits that make upan Air RapidResponse Kit.(photo by MSgtPaul Fazzini)


CommandFocus

Air Force SpecialOperations Command

Light, lean, and mean. That’s how the AirForce Special Operations Command wasintentionally established in 1992. It’s also amantra for the engineers of AFSOC as theygo about their day-to-day work in a majorcommand that’s growing and changing byleaps and bounds.

“Just late last year, when people thought of usthey thought of the ‘one-base’ MAJCOM,because we only had Hurlburt Field,” said ColEdmond Keith, the AFSOC Civil Engineer.

That’s no longer the case. On October 1, 2003,Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) movedfrom Air Combat Command to AFSOC,giving them 7,000 more people and anothermain operating base, Moody AFB, Ga.

The addition of CSAR doesn’t account forall of AFSOC’s growth, however. “We werealready growing at a tremendous rate beforethe decision to move CSAR,” said Col Keith.This fast growth gives HQ AFSOC’s inten-tionally “lean” staff of 27 engineers a lot ofwork to do—much of it right on their homebase, Hurlburt Field, which is “one of thefastest growing installations in the AirForce,” according to Col Keith.

Over the last 10 years, Hurlburt’s squarefootage has increased by sixty percent andthe 16th SOW is now the seventh largestwing in the Air Force, with close to 8,500people (about 7,500 military). “We have flatrun out of room,” Col Keith said. “We’vebuilt on every piece of property we can—anything else is wetland, in an airfieldobstruction zone, or has some form of landuse constraint.”

Housing privatization is one way AFSOC isaddressing their need for space. A partner-ship between AFSOC and Air Force MaterielCommand on one of the largest housingprivatization projects in the Air Force will

result in 2,155 new and conveyed houses.Nearly 2,600 houses on Hurlburt Field andEglin AFB will be demolished and 2,015 newhouses will be built. Hurlburt’s main basecontains 306 of the houses identified fordemolition; these houses will be rebuilt onproperty between Hurlburt and Eglin, whichwill open up 100 acres on Hurlburt Field fornew growth and make room for facilities thatare needed for the special operations mission.

The funds for building many of AFSOC’sfacilities come from a source not available toany other Air Force major command: MajorForce Program 11 (MFP-11) funds. MFP-11funds were established by the same legisla-tion that created the U.S. Special OperationsCommand (SOCOM) and make AFSOC alittle different. “Unlike any other MAJCOM,we are also the air component for a combat-ant commander and the only combatantcommander with their own fund source,”said Col Keith.

AFSOC, along with Army and Navy specialoperations forces (SOF), earns MFP-11funds from SOCOM and the funds can beused only for SOF missions. AFSOC alsocompetes with other major commands forAir Force funds, and although the program-ming processes for the two types of fundsare similar, they must be kept strictly sepa-rate. According to Lt Col Sally Macon, chiefof AFSOC’s Programs Division, “Thechallenge comes early, in knowing whichprograms are SOF-specific and which are AirForce programs, such as CSAR.”

SOCOM support means that AFSOC—asmall command in number of bases—measures up to other, larger commands in theamount of military construction (MILCON)funds it receives. It doesn’t, however, meanthat AFSOC gets a larger staff to handle thework. “We’re considered a two-baseMAJCOM, but we serve two masters. We

Teresa HoodEditor

Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 5

Colonel Edmond B. Keith became theCivil Engineer for Headquarters AirForce Special Operations Command inJuly 2003. Col Keith is a graduate ofthe Virginia Military Institute with aB.S. in Electrical Engineering.Commissioned in 1982 through theReserve Officer Training Corps atVMI, his first assignment was as anelectrical engineer at Pope AFB, N.C.Col Keith has spent his entire AirForce career in civil engineering, withtours at every level of command: HQUSAF, MAJCOM, and field. Heoversees all components of civilengineering for AFSOC’s 19,952personnel (17,650 military) on 32bases (14 active duty and 18 Guardor Reserve).

have two different programs, with twodifferent agendas, with two different FYDPs,”said Lt Col Mohsen Parhizkar, who heads astaff of five as Chief of AFSOC’s Engineer-ing Division.

Much of AFSOC’s SOCOM-funded growthis global, taking them much further afield thanHurlburt. A Contingency Response Elementwill receive $95.1 million for facilities tosupport SOCOM’s continued Southwest Asiapresence. At RAF Mildenhall, a $34 millionMILCON project will allow SOF units to behoused in one compound called CommandoCentral. AFSOC will receive $148 million tobed down new MC-130 aircraft inside andoutside the continental United States, andanother $99 million for the new, self-deployable CV-22s.

A larger global mission and an additionalfunding source are not the only things that makecivil engineering different at AFSOC. “Becausewe’re the numbered Air Force for a combatantcommander, we get very involved in the directsupport of the warfighter,” said Col Keith.

To support their air commandos and rescuewarriors AFSOC engineers developed the AirRapid Response Kit (ARRK) and the GlobalSituational Awareness Tool (GSAT).

The ARRK was designed for expedientbeddown of first-in deployers—usually SOFforces—and is the epitome of light and lean.It provides basic support for 100 people untilHarvest packages arrive (up to 14 days later),includes a small command tent, fits on justthree pallets, and can be set up by as few astwo engineers.

“We gave the ARRK to our warriors andthey loved it and we thought that was it,”said Mr. Tom Graham, Chief of CE Readi-ness for AFSOC. “But then other unitswithin AFSOC, such as CSAR, said ‘it’s stilltoo heavy’ so we created different versionsto accommodate them: the ARRK Lite, STand Mini. And now we have folks outside ofAFSOC interested in it.” (see article on theARRK on p. 6).

AFSOC created GSAT to provide “situ-ational awareness,” a broader, more regional

preview of conditions (e.g.,environmental, medical,political, geographic, etc.) inan operational area. “Weneeded to take a differentapproach to looking at theenvironment,” said AFSOC’sEnvironmental DivisionChief, Mr. MichaelApplegate. “It’s an interest-ing turnabout—we look atwhat a particular environ-ment might do to us ratherthan what impact we mighthave on that environment.”

GSAT contains variouslayers of information—Geographic InformationSystems, imagery and data—from many sources, includ-ing the U.S. Department ofDefense, the U.S. Depart-ment of Agriculture, the CIAWorldbook, and the ArmedForces Medical IntelligenceCenter, to provide multipleuses for multiple customers.The Environmental Divisionis partnering with others inAFSOC, such as the medicaland safety offices, to ensurethe broadest use of GSAT.

GSAT can be used toevaluate potential beddownlocations for soil conditions,floodplain locations, or local industries that might affect airand water quality. It might be used by those in the medicalfield to identify endemic disease or disease-carrying vectorsin a given location. GSAT can also enhance flight safety byproviding migratory bird patterns to evaluate the risk of birdair strikes. Evenutally, users will have access to GSAT via asecure Web site.

“The three ideas that the Air Force Special Operations Com-mand emphasizes is that we are ‘growing, changing, andbecoming more vital,’ especially with the Global War onTerrorism. Our role as engineers is to enable the growth andchange, and to support our air commandos and rescue war-riors,” said Col. Keith. “A side benefit to all we do is that we arelearning lessons on how to become lighter, leaner and meanerthat are going to translate to the rest of the Air Force.”


When every ounce counts,

sometimes “small” isn’t

small enough

When every ounce counts,

sometimes “small” isn’t

small enough

Building the ARRK

MSgt Michael A. WardHQ AFCESA/PA

When special operations troops deploy, they are often the first ones in, most

times into remote, austere locations with minimum equipment and support.

No cots, sleeping bags, latrines or showers. Just them and the horse, helicopter

or vehicle they rode in on.

That’s changing thanks to a group of AirForce Special Operations Command civilengineers. About three years ago, they starteddeveloping a set of right-sized deploymentpackages called Air Rapid Response Kits(ARRKs) that can provide deployed troopswith some basic, short-term, quality-of-lifeand functional comforts.

“When we went to war, we found out thatour guys were getting there earlier thaneverybody else,” said Col Ed Keith, theAFSOC Civil Engineer. “We had nothing togive our warriors so they operated out oftheir aircraft. They had no place to sleep, nolatrines; they had absolutely no structure.”

“We picked the brains of some people thathad recently deployed and asked, ‘What are

the absolute minimum things that you reallywanted to have?’” said Andrew Wardencki,an NBC analyst at AFSOC and a member ofthe ARRK team since its inception. “It prettymuch came down to the same thing: ‘Shelterover my head, somewhere to sleep, hygiene, alatrine system, and a small work facility.’”

When the Air Force deploys, the troops arenormally supported by prepackaged, trans-portable, bare-base kits called HarvestFalcon and Harvest Eagle. Those kitscontain everything needed to construct atent city complete with latrines, showers,kitchen and electrical power generation.

That’s great for a large force—the HarvestFalcon kits supports 1,100 people, and theHarvest Eagle kit supports 550—but

Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 7

AFSOC needed something to support small teams of troopsbeing inserted behind the lines or beneath the radar. Whatthey developed were the ARRKs—four kits tailored to meetthe unique needs of special operations missions, eventhough they don’t provide quite all the comforts of home.“Our packages don’t have the creature comforts that the bigpackages have in them,” said Mr. Wardencki. “We don’t putin heating and air conditioning, because those things addweight and they have a big power draw.”

The largest kit, called the ARRK, can support about 100people. It contains five billeting tents, an administrative tent,latrine tents, a shower-and-shave tent, a 3,000-gallon waterbladder and an electrical generator. Only seven to 10 engineersare required to set it up. Most important, though, is its size.It’s compact enough to fit on only three pallets, meaning it canbe easily transported on only one of almost any cargo air-craft—it takes 18 C-17s to transport the Harvest Falcon kit.

Next is the ARRK Lite, which can support 50 people. Itconsists of five billeting tents, two other tents and a chemi-cal latrine system. “This doesn’t come with a fancy shower. Itcomes with (anti-bacterial hygiene wipes). One wipe willwash one person head to toe,” said SMSgt Chuck Dewar,who heads up the ARRK cadre—members of the 16th CES

at Hurlburt Field, who have worked with theARRK since it’s beginning.

The ARRK Lite is so small it doesn’t requireadditional pallets. Instead, it can be insertedinto existing pallets. It also doesn’t requiredirect civil engineer support to assemble.“We provide it to the warriors and give themsome basic training on it. Then they carry itforward at deployment,” said Col Keith.

The ARRK ST (special tactics) is similar tothe ARRK, but supports 20 people. “SpecialTactics said they loved the ARRK butneeded something smaller,” said Mr. TomGraham, AFSOC’s Chief of CE Readiness.

The smallest version is the ARRK Mini,which is essentially a high-tech folding cotwith a built-in tent, anti-bacterial hygienecloths and a few chemical potty bags. The kitis small enough to fit into one bag and iscarried in the airframe. It doesn’t sound likemuch but it’s a welcome sight when the onlyother option is sleeping and living amongst

With only three pallets in the largestARRK, weighing in at 20,900 poundslbs. total, loading them into this C-130 isfast work. By comparison, it takes 18C-17s to transport a Harvest Falcon kit.(photo by SrA Ebony J. Pierre)


the rocks. “Our guys were typically lying intheir helicopter’s airframe or lying under-neath it,” said Mr. Graham.

The ARRK concept has been so successfulthat other organizations, including AirborneRED HORSE and the R-1 RED HORSElead element are looking into it. “Althoughboth these RED HORSE elements alreadyhave their own equipment sets, some of theARRK’s innovative concepts could beincorporated to improve their capabilities,”said Maj. Stephen Wood, Air CombatCommand’s RED HORSE program manager.

As part of a demontration at ScottAFB, Ill., two airmen unpack ARRKcomponents. In the background are twolatrine privacy tents and a billeting tent.The ARRK is a hybrid of military andcommercial components. It also containsall the equipment necessary for set-up.Proper packing is key to maintaining theARRK’s small size. (photo by MSgtPaul Fazzini)

Although the ARRKs are a welcome sightfor deployed troops, the civil engineers stressthat they are only a stopgap measure, not areplacement for the Harvest kits.

“What we’re providing gives them an initialcapability until an engineer team can get inthere with heavier stuff,” said Col Keith. “Itgives the warrior something to operate outof for 14–30 days until the rest of the AirForce catches up.”

MSgt Michael A. Ward is the Chief of PublicAffairs for HQ AFCESA, Tyndall AFB, Fla.

During a demonstration at HurlburtField, Mr. Andrew Wardencki asks avisiting airman to try out a tent cot, partof the ARRK Mini. (photo by theauthor)

Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 9

The cat’s out of the bag:force development promisesa new destiny for engineers.We are on the cusp ofevolutionary change thatdares senior officers tocultivate leaders who cancommand and integratemissions outside theirspecialized career field.

With full implementationslated for October 2004,force development is on thefast track. Brig Gen RichardS. Hassan, Air Force SeniorLeadership ManagementOffice Director, stated thatthe overall goal of forcedevelopment is to “success-fully accomplish…Air Forcemissions by developingofficers with the requiredskills, knowledge and experi-ence to lead and executecurrent and future missioncapabilities.”

Enabling current and futuremission capabilities requiresinterdisciplinary thinking—an extraordinary cultural shiftfrom typical “stovepiped”careerism. Nevertheless, themessage is clear. Seniorleaders have an unprec-edented responsibility toenable every officer to reachtheir full potential. Whatdoes this mean for

mentoring future engineers?How should junior officersbe counseled on the keyaspects of engineer develop-ment? When asked thesequestions during a recentaddress at a MAJCOM BaseCivil Engineer Conference,Maj Gen L. Dean Fox, TheAir Force Civil Engineer,answered succinctly, “…advisethem to over-compete!”

Although engineers have alegacy of proven mentoring,they did so in a different way.Now senior engineers needto think in broader terms,not to develop just engineers,or logisticians, or communi-cations officers, but AirForce leaders—in otherwords, to over-compete.

Regrettably, career counsel-ing is often analogous toAlice’s encounter with theCheshire Cat in LewisCarroll’s Alice in Wonderland:

‘Would you tell me, please,which way I ought to go fromhere?’

‘That depends a good deal onwhere you want to get to,’ saidthe Cat.

‘I don’t much care where—’ saidAlice.

Engineer ForceDevelopment:Which Way fromHere?

‘Then it doesn’t matter whichway you go,’ said the Cat.

Senior leaders must offerbetter, more informedcounsel to junior engineersthan the cat gave to Alice.We must understandbranches and sequels forcareer planning, and mostassuredly realize that there isno longer only one path orone end state.

Force development is aboutsmarter utilization of thetotal force. It assumes thatnot all engineers will need orwant to be developedthrough all three career-planning levels (see sidebar,p. 10). The Air Force Chiefof Staff, Gen John P.Jumper has said, “Weneed great tactical andoperationalleaders…we will valueeach and every one ofthem, at all levels.

Force developmentimproves ourreturn on trainingand educationinvestments,and

commentary byLt Col Jon A. RoopEUCOM


ensures cross-career assignments thatinstill the full depth and breadth of AirForce competencies. This means thattactical-level considerations should nowinclude operational deployments andacquisition training, as well as professionalregistration, which is not currently an AirForce requirement for engineers.

At the operational level, we should suggestlooking past traditional staff and squadroncommand billets as measures of merit,and risk venturing outside the career fieldinto developmental assignment opportuni-ties such as joint, sister-service or opera-tional billets.

The strategic level has seen the mostchange. Engineers are now considered,and readily requested, as commanders ofmission support groups and air basewings. The shift to greater reliance onjoint interoperability and mission readi-

ness means combatant command engineerbillets will become highly sought. Sweepingmajor command transformations may soonlead to senior engineers being principalcandidates for mission support directors.

Yes, the cat is out of the bag, but likeCarroll’s Cheshire Cat, an engineer’s careermay look good-natured, yet it still has“…very long claws and a great many teeth,and it ought to be treated with respect.”We must treat each engineer with greatrespect as we guide the development oftheir skills, knowledge, and experience tomeet the challenges of expeditionaryoperations. Force development will resultin significant changes to officer progres-sion and requires innovative thought whilewe mentor our engineer corps now andwell into the future.

Lt Col Jon A. Roop is the chief of ContingencyOperations Branch, European Command.

Force development doctrine consists of three levels:tactical, operational and strategic (see chart below).

Tactical: Emphasis is on learning primary skills atthe tactical level. The basic toolbox consists ofreadiness skills for expeditionary operations, practi-cal engineer project management experience,

professional officership, and personal developmentof core values.

Operational: Emphasis is on development ofcomplementary skills and an understanding of thebroader Air Force mission, learning how to combinea wide range of warfighting capabilities to enhanceor complete an Air Force or joint-service mission.This is the first chance for the engineer to startputting all the pieces together; to answer the “why”questions generated from years of tactical leveldevelopment.

Strategic: Emphasis is on combining skills andexperiences to develop a knowledge base thatextends beyond the Air Force into Defense Depart-ment, interagency and international arenas. Forcedevelopment has created new broadening opportu-nities external to classic engineer roles.

Force Development Doctrine

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

5 10 15 20 25 30Years

Off

icer

Req

uir

emen

ts(n

um

ber

of p

eop

le in

CE)

Basic Development Window

Intermediate Development Window

Senior Development Window

MGT 585(req'd)

MGT 101(req'd)

Requirements

Tactical

Operational

Strategic

CE Forces

Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 11

A New UnderstandingMSgt Michael A. WardHQ AFCESA/PA

Nearly 100 people from the Air Force, Army,Navy, Marines and industry attended the firstCivil Engineer Joint Senior NCO Symposium,April 20-22, at Tyndall AFB, Fla.

The conference, sponsored by the Air ForceCivil Engineer Support Agency (AFCESA)and the Society of American Military Engi-neers (SAME), brought together a mix ofsenior NCOs and contractors to discuss civilengineer activities during Operation ENDUR-ING FREEDOM.

“We wanted to bring the top enlisted engi-neers from the sister services together so wecould discuss the lessons learned from therecent conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq,” saidSMSgt. Jim Lucas, symposium project officer.But what the attendees wound up talkingabout had less to do with the war and morewith discovering each other’s capabilities.

“The Marine Corps deals a lot with the Armyand a little with the Navy, but with the AirForce, hardly at all,” said Master GunnerySergeant James Washington, HQ MarineCorps Logistics and Installation Division. “Asfar as their actual job, we just don’t know.”

“Honestly, I didn’t know the Marines hadengineers,” said MSgt Sue Parker, SheppardAFB, Texas. “I thought the Navy prettymuch took care of their requirements.”

The services have had little interaction in thepast in part because each has a unique contin-gency engineering mission.

“My background is in combat engineering, andwe do very rough, fundamental-type construc-tion for initial theater support,” said ArmySergeant Major Perry Hamilton, 11th EngineerBattalion, Ft. Stewart, Ga. “We don’t have thefinesse of the Seabees or the managementskills of the Air Force.”

Because of the lack of interaction and familiar-ity, many attendees came to the symposiumwith preset ideas about the other services.

“This conference helped dispel some of theassumptions we each had about our sister

services,” said Master Chief Petty OfficerJohn Mulholland, HQ Navy Facility Engi-neering Command, Washington, D.C.

The services have conducted joint training foryears, but have lagged behind in actual jointoperations. SAME, which recently began apush to include more enlisted members in itsorganization, realized that, while senior civilengineer officers from the different servicesoften interact, there was no similar forum forsenior enlisted civil engineers.

“Getting all the civil engineer senior NCOstogether is something we’ve needed to do for along time,” said retired Rear Admiral MichaelJohnson, SAME president. “We talk a lot aboutbeing ‘joint,’ but we really needed to dosomething about being ‘joint.’”

Now that they’ve been formally introduced,attendees said the next step is to change theculture within their own ranks.

“For so many years it was, ‘we’re Marines, wedon’t mess with you guys,’” said MasterGunnery Sergeant Washington. “We needconferences like these so that when theyounger guys come up, unlike us they will havea better understanding.”

Joint service

senior NCOs learn

they are more

alike than

different

During a symposium field trip, StaffSergeant Jeffrey Lee Murrill, USMC,received a briefing on the FA-22 from a43rd Fighter Squadron maintenance crewmember. (U.S. Air Force photo)


Rigged,Ready

andRED

Maj Stephen D. WoodHQ ACC/CEXO

During deployments in support of OperationIraqi Freedom, three Airborne RED HORSE(ARH) teams demonstrated why they arecrucial to combatant commanders. Supportingmissions at three different locations in Iraq, theteams validated U.S. Air Force Chief of StaffGeneral John P. Jumper’s vision for “jumpinghorses” to give commanders an airborne initialairfield assessment and repair capability.

The ARH teams were built from Air CombatCommand’s three active-duty RED HORSEsquadrons: the 819th RHS, Malmstrom AFB,Mont.; the 820th RHS, Nellis AFB, Nev.; andthe 823rd RHS, Hurlburt Field, Fla. The onlyother active-duty RHS, the 554th at Osan AB,

Korea, is assigned to Pacific AirForces. ARH teams consist of35 airmen: 21 airmen from the

RHS with a broad cross sectionof engineering capabilities; six

explosive ordnance disposal (EOD)technicians; six fire crash-rescue

specialists; and two readinesstroops that specialize innuclear, biological andchemical (NBC) defense.

Now back from OIF, Air-borne RED HORSE is usinglessons learned from their deploy-ments to fine-tune all elements oftheir teams. Each of the ARHteams will stay with its parentRHS, and the EOD, Fire Crash-Rescue and Readiness airmen will

come from three supporting CE squadrons:the 1st CES, Langley AFB (with the 823rdRHS); the 99th CES, Nellis AFB (with the820th RHS); and the 366th CES, MountainHome AFB (with the 819th RHS).

Airborne RED HORSE is postured todeploy with a Contingency Response Unit(CRU), and is paired with the 820th SecurityForces Group, Moody AFB, Ga., throughtheir Global Mobility CONOPS, specificallythe “Open the Air Base” module, as a Tier 1support element, primarily to assess airfieldsfor aircraft landings. In addition to theAFSC-required training for each skill-set onthe team, all ARH airmen must be airborne-qualified; additional training includes airassault and pathfinder qualifications.

Airborne RED HORSE is currently refiningand standardizing equipment supply listings,and fielding new equipment to meet require-ments. An important goal is for all ARH teamsto be configured the same and operate from astandard “play book,” to allow deployments inechelons as the mission requires.

For equipment, smaller is better as airframesbecome a highly sought commodity during aconflict, even when bigger might mean fasterrepairs. “There are some craters that we couldhandle faster with bigger equipment, but thetrade-off for speed of assessment is wellworth the extra time we might possibly spendin repair,” said SMSgt Michael DeShon, 819thRHS, who has worked with ARH since 2001.

An ARH team repairs a spall on a runway at an Iraqi air base using equipment from the MARES: CAT 420 backhoe (left)and IHI IC-45 crawler carrier (right).

Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 13

ARH can reach back for anyheavy equipment they needand act as engineering “eyeson the ground” for anybeddown planning or poten-tial operational problems.

Equipment pieces in ARH’skit, the MARES (MobileAirfeld Repair EquipmentSet), are smaller, lighter andruggedized versions of theirbigger brothers: two CAT 277multi-tracked loaders (skidsteers); a CAT 420-D ITbackhoe; an IHI IC-45crawler carrier (tracked dumptruck); a tracked trailer; aPolaris Ranger; and a Polaris

Airborne RED HORSE is a reality

and it’s ready for its next mission

Sportsman 700. Otherequipment used by ARHteams includes the AllPurpose Remote TransportSystem (ARTS) EOD robot,Polaris-mounted FireResponse Expeditionary(FRE) equipment (a high-pressure fire fighting sys-tem), three additional PolarisRangers, and three morePolaris Sportsman 700ATVs. All the equipmentwill be airdrop- andslingload-certified.

TSgt Dave Keeley, a memberof the 823rd RHS that air-landed at Baghdad Inter-

national Airport during OIF,summed up the unique skillsof Airborne RED HORSE:“Nowhere in the world willyou find a unit with the totalcapabilities that we bring tothe fight. Not only are weparatroopers, our craftsmenare the masters of theirrespective trades. The key toour success lies in our cross-training.”

Maj Stephen D. Wood is Chiefof the Command REDHORSE program for HQACC’s Readiness Division.

An Airborne RED HORSE team withequipment can get to the fight usingone of three arrival modes: air land, airinsert, or air drop.

Air land is a typical cargo aircraftdelivery method, where team mem-bers and equipment load onto and offthe plane on the ground. This is theideal method in terms of risk andpotential costs. However, there isn’talways landing and take-off spacewhere ARH has to go, so they need theability to arrive in other ways.

Air insert is arrival by helicopter. Equip-ment is slingloaded from helicopters,carried to the location and set down. If

there’s space, the helicopter lands tounload the team; otherwise, teammembers rappel down. Training andcertification is received through theArmy’s Air Assault School. The risks aregreater than air-landing, but this methodlets ARH rapidly move forward afterinitial arrival in the area of operations.

Air drop is parachuting team mem-bers and equipment from aircraft. Thismethod has the greatest risks, butoffers the longest range, and gives ARHthe ability to get to essential airfieldswhen there is no other option. Teammembers must be airborne-qualifiedthrough the Army’s Basic AirborneCourse at Ft. Benning, Ga.

Getting ARH On-SiteGetting ARH On-Site


The 554th RED HORSE Squadron, OsanAB, Korea, recently broke a new boundaryby graduating five people from the U.S.Army Air Assault School with soldiers of the25th Infantry Division, Schofield Barracks,Hawaii. These five are the first Air Assault–qualified RED HORSE engineers and formthe foundation for the 554th RHS Assault,Assessment, and Repair Operations (AARO;pronounced “arrow”) team, which is in-tended to advance wartime engineeringcapabilities on the Korean Peninsula and inthe Pacific theater. Focused on using seizedairfields, rather than establishing new ones,AARO teams will provide air componentcommanders the rapid engi-neering capability necessaryto turn cratered runways intohubs of operation. An initialcapability demonstration isscheduled for June 2004.

The four phases of AirAssault School are precededby “Zero Day,” the infamousrite of passage. A Friday“o’dark-thirty” formation andinspection of 100 candidatescomes right before an intense“Smoke Session” with cadremembers in the middle ofOahu’s wet and overgrownEast Range. The many“Sergeant Air Assaults” seekto separate those with thenecessary physical ability anddetermination from thosewithout. “Go ahead and quit!”they yell while candidatesperform countless flutter kicksand push-ups in the muddy,red clay. “I’ll still have my jobon Monday morning!”

Once the Air Assault hopefuls are eithereffectively “smoked” or reach total musclefailure, the Obstacle Course begins. Nineobstacles are included, with two attempts ateach. The Tough One and Confidence Climbare required “goes,” and only two total “no-goes” are allowed. Candidates carry severalfive-gallon water cans wherever they go, anddouble-time and sing jodies betweenobstacles. Immediately after the ObstacleCourse, candidates head out on a two-milerun through the East Range’s toughest terrain,with just 18 minutes to complete it. At theend of the long, rocky road, Heartbreak Hillwaits—more than a quarter mile straight back

RED HORSE Assault:Coming Soon to a Theater Near You

Capt Terry Vance554th RHS

RED HORSE takes

on the ‘10 hardest

days in the Army’

Right: Candidates practice their skills onthe rappelling tower. (photo courtesy554th RHS)

Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 15

up. By lunchtime on Zero Day, everyone’s inpain. Some are headed home—better lucknext time!

All too quickly, Monday comes and AirAssault School begins. Each phase intenselytests both the physical and mental capabilitiesof the attendees. The first phase, PathfinderOperations, deals with aircraft familiarization;medevac operations; helicopter landing siteoperations and marking; hand and armsignals; and operation planning. Pull-ups anddecline diamond push-ups during each hourlybreak from class help keep soldiers “en-thused.” The mornings are also filled withformation runs and a rugged, four-mileforced ruck march. The standard ruck load is40 pounds, including helmets and rifles. Fallan arm’s length behind the soldier in front ofyou, and you’re on your way home.

The second phase, Slingload Operations, isconsidered the most challenging. In a typical

class, more than 20 percent of the studentsmay fail the hands-on slingload inspectiontest and be gone. Students learn aboutaircraft limitations; slingload equipment; andrequirements, rigging and inspection ofslingloads. Following an early-morningforced march—six miles with a standardruck—students get two minutes each toinspect four separate slingloads, and mustcite four out of five deficiencies on each.Miss one gig and you’ll survive. Miss two?Again, better luck next time.

Third is the Rappel Phase. In the first fewhours of exposure to rappelling, all studentslearn to tie their own military rappel seatsand are soon bounding from the 45-foot tall

rappel tower. By the end of the phase,students must be able to correctly tie amilitary rappel seat within 90 seconds andexecute four separate technical rappels,including two with a full combat load. If youfail to lock in properly, or lose your brakehand…see you next class! Total success inthis phase is followed by the pinnacle of AirAssault School, a 90-foot combat rappelfrom a UH-60 Blackhawk. But class is notquite over when you hit the ground...

The fourth phase begins with formation thenext morning at 0300 hours. That gives thecadre enough time to transport, thoroughlyinspect, and stretch students for the final testof will—the 12-mile ruck march. Positionedunder the Air Assault School arch at 0500hours, students are released in the dark ontheir predetermined course with three hoursto return. Thoroughly exhausted, feetblistered, and drenched in sweat, soldiersrejoice at the finish line. They’ve now earned

the right to wear Air Assault wings. For themembers of the 554th RHS, it is a specialday. Proudly representing the best the AirForce has to offer, they proved to soldiers ofthe 25th Infantry Division that “those AirForce guys are in pretty good shape.”

All Air Assault graduates are certifiedSlingload Inspectors, a dividend for any uniton the battlefield. To further the internalcapabilities of AARO, the 554th RHS hasalso certified the first two Air Force mem-bers through the Helicopter Rope Suspen-sion Techniques Master Course, taught bythe 3rd Marine Regiment, Kaneohe MCB,Hawaii. Troops return to their units ascertified Rappel, Fast Rope, and Special

Patrol Insertion/ExtractionMasters, equipped with theexpertise to conduct trainingand real-world rappeloperations day or night.

By September 2004, the554th AARO team willconsist of 21 highly trainedHorsemen. In addition totheir usual RED HORSEskills, they are also trainingin air base defense, infantrytactics, heavy weapons, andfield medicine, for jointoperations under groundthreat levels I-III. REDHORSE is well known forconstructing the physicalbackbone necessary toproject air power fromforward locations, althoughnot necessarily after insert-

ing their equipment withhelicopters. Under certaincircumstances, air insertionwill give RED HORSE afaster, safer method ofmovement around thantraditional convoys.

Capt Terry Vance is the ChiefEngineer, 554th RHS, OsanAB, Korea.

Left: Candidates hang from a helomoving 80 mph.Center: The view from the bottomposition on the rope.Right: Rappelling from astationary helo.(photos courtesy 554th RHS)


Engineers Take to the Air… AgainDr. Ronald B. Hartzer

HQ AFCESAThe general needed a base close to the frontlines for his aircraft to support the rapidlyadvancing ground forces. Calling upon a newgroup of engineers for the job, he sent inairborne engineers who loaded their speciallydesigned equipment on transport planes andflew deep into the desert. After only 24hours, the runways were ready for the firstaircraft to arrive. Sound like a CNN reporton Airborne RED HORSE activities fromOperation Iraqi Freedom? Actually, itoccurred during World War II operations inNorth Africa, where the military first testedthe concept of airborne engineers.

World War II Aviation Engineers built orrepaired airfields in every theater. Firstorganized in 1940 as part of the Army butassigned to the Army Air Forces, they soonbecame an indispensable part of the Ameri-can military. However, in May 1942, BrigGen Stuart C. Godfrey, Air Engineer, AAF,recognized the need for aviation engineerswho could respond whenever and whereverneeded, even behind enemy lines to con-struct or repair expedient airfields. Hewanted engineers who could parachute intoenemy territory, establish an emergency stripand, using lightweight equipment landed bygliders, improve the runway until it couldaccommodate transports and tactical planes.

The greatest challenge the engineers facedwas the size and weight of their equipment.Working with manufacturers, Brig GenGodfrey’s experts developed a set of speciallydesigned equipment that could fit inside aC-47 or a Waco Glider.

In only four months, Brig Gen Godfrey’sdream came true when the Army establishedthe first Airborne Engineer Aviation battal-ions just in time to see action in NorthAfrica. After a few weeks of work in Mo-rocco, the 871st Airborne Engineer AviationBattalion flew 1,000 miles to establish a drybase for Maj Gen Jimmy Doolittle’s B-17bombers at Biskra, Algeria. While thissuccessful operation seemed to hold greatpromise, a simultaneous project by the 888thAirborne Engineer Aviation Company(AEAC) showed the unit’s inherent inad-equacies. After one day of work on anairfield near Tebessa, Algeria, it began rainingand engineers quickly discovered the limita-tions of their miniature machinery. After 15days, the airborne engineers returned to therear area, replaced by a standard battalion tocomplete the work.

Airborne engineers saw limited activity in theEuropean Theater. Following the D-Dayinvasion, airborne units were not needed so

Right: Brig Gen James E. Newman, Jr.(center, pointing down), CommandingGeneral of the 9th Air Force Engineers,explains how an airborne (midget)bulldozer is used to build and repairairstrips in Liberated France. (U.S. AirForce photo)

Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 17

they performed small construction projectsand maintenance work.

The airborne aviation engineers saw theirmost exciting action on the other side of theglobe. In March 1944, members of the 900thAEAC joined British General OrdeWingate’s famous band of Chindits in aglider-borne landing 200 miles behind enemylines in the jungle of Burma. The troopsbegan work immediately and had a landingstrip available the next night for transportaircraft. They eventually completed fiverunways, often picking up their weapons todefend the new airfield from Japaneseattackers. Airborne units performed similarmissions at Tsili Tsili, Nadzab, and Gusap,New Guinea. However, they just could notperform up to the standards of a regularbattalion because they had only lightweightequipment and two-thirds the people. Theirscrapers got clogged with heavy jungle grassand the miniature graders often just bounced

Left: A crew loads engineering equipmentinto a Douglas C-47 of the 1st AirCommando Force at Tamu, Burma.Right: An airborne engineer uses aminiature bulldozer to lengthen a runwayat Tamu, Burma. Below: Glider-landedaviation engineers tow their glider off theairstrip at Myitkyina, Burma.(U.S. Air Force photos)

along the surface. Commanders assignedroutine or menial tasks to the airborneengineers because of their limited capabili-ties. By the end of the war, the airborneunits had been furnished with standard sizeengineering equipment.

Following the war, a Board of Engineersevaluated the airborne aviation engineermission. While they recognized the limitedproductivity and capacity of the equipment,the board validated the concept and recom-mended “that doctrine and techniques ofairborne operations and development ofairborne engineer equipment be continuallyreviewed.” Little did they know that it wouldtake 55 years for another airborne engineerunit to be established.

Dr. Ronald B. Hartzer is an Air Force historianand Chief of Professional Communications forHQ AFCESA, Tyndall AFB, Fla.


Icy Crossing

Building a bridge in sub-zero weather is notmost people’s idea of fun.

For Mr. Mike Skow and Eielson AFB’s civilengineers, it’s the only time to do it—literally.Mr. Skow, 354th Civil Engineer Squadronrange maintenance foreman, and his teamhave perfected the art of building ice bridges.

Give them freezing temperatures and fiveweeks and they can build you a 5'-deep, mile-long ice bridge—capable of supporting morethan 110 tons—that completely vanishes afew months later.

“People from many other bases can just driveright up to their ranges. Here, even in thesummertime, we can drive to only one of ourthree ranges—the other two are surroundedby wetlands and can only be reached byhelicopter. In the winter, though, our icebridges let us drive to those other ranges tobring in fuel, equipment and support sup-plies,” said Mr. Skow, who has been buildingice bridges for more than 25 years.

Eielson’s three ranges are a part of the60,000 square-mile Pacific Alaska RangeComplex—the largest over-land rangecomplex in North America. This high-techrange complex gives U.S. and allied pilots theopportunity to fly over varied terrain whileresponding to simulated threats.

“We provide a realistic combat readinessrange for nearly 20 nations to train in,” saidSMSgt John O’Brien, 354th CES rangemaintenance superintendent. “We have to goonto each range about once a year andrebuild and maintain the targets.”

Alaska’s characteristically cold Novemberweather heralds the start of the ice-bridge–building season. As soon as a river freezes toa depth of about 8" the maintenance teamclears off the snow—which acts as aninsulator—to make a crossing about 300'wide. Then they bring out the augers to drillan 8"- wide hole through the ice down to therunning water.

Once that’s done, they place a small typhoonpump in the hole and start the pumpingprocess. They can usually keep a hole openabout two hours—during that time, they’llspray more than 60,000 gallons of water ontop of the ice. The process continues 24hours a day, seven days a week, until the iceis 60" thick—a feat even the team membersfind impressive.

“I am able to do something that no one elsein the Air Force can do,” said TSgt ShawnKelly, 354th CES NCO in charge of rangemaintenance. “It’s kind of hard to imaginefive feet of ice below your feet—that the iceis almost as deep as a person.”

When the ice is 20" thick, the team starts tobuild the snow ramps on and off the icebridge. “We start with small vehicles,” saidMr. Skow. “We bring out some small bull-dozers and pickup trucks with plows. We’llbuild the ramps onto the bridge out of snow

MSgt Andrew Gates354th FW/PA

Air Force engineers in Alaska build bridges that “disappear”

SrA Jeremiah Anderson and SrA JasonHaines keep water flowing through a typhoonpump during ice bridge building. (photo byauthor)

Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 19

and soak the ramps down with water, sincesnow alone won’t pack hard enough to beable to support the equipment we’ll take tothe range.”

Enough supplies, equipment and materialmove over an ice bridge to keep a rangesupplied for two years, so the team usuallybuilds only one bridge a year, alternatingbetween crossings. This year, however, a$19.5 million new range complex project atthe Blair Lake Range meant the team had tobuild a bridge over the Tanana River, as wellas the one already scheduled to cross theDelta Junction and reach the OklahomaBombing Range.

This experience is eye-opening to peoplegetting their first taste of the career field. “Iget so much pride out of the work I do here,”said SrA Jason Haines, 354th CES equipmentoperator. “Nowhere else in the Air Force willI get the chance to build an ice bridge.”

One unwritten benefit to the job is theopportunity to experience an Alaska veryfew people get to see. “I have a really greatoffice,” Mr. Skow said, waving at the vastopen space surrounding him.

MSgt Andrew Gates is a public affairs specialist forthe 354th FW at Eielson AFB, Alaska.

The number of pumps and water sourceholes depends on how Mother Naturefreezes the river. If the ice is flat, as fewas four pumps can handle a day’s worth offlooding; a “jagged ice” day could involvesix pumps, relocated up to three times.(photo courtesy of 354th CES)

In a two-hour period, one typhoon pumpcan spray more than 60,000 gallons ofwater onto the ice. The slush cone thatforms around the hole is left in place toprevent water from draining back into theriver. (photo courtesy 354th CES)

Building up the bridge is a gradualprocess. With 14" of solid ice, the bridgewill support a 4x4 pickup. At 24" youcan drive a JD-670 grader over it; at 48",a D-7 dozer. The finished ice bridge cansupport up to 110 tons. (photo courtesyof 354th CES)

The diagram at left depicts the bridgebuilt across the Tanana River. Duringspring breakup, the glacier-fed riversurges and shifts main channels. Beforethe winter freeze the team flies over in ahelicopter to locate the “new”mainchannels—this winter there were three.(diagram by SMSgt John O’Brien)


Camp Anaconda gave way to Balad AB as members of the 332nd ECES rapidly builtan Air Force base within an Army stronghold. Formerly an Iraqi Air Force Academy seizedby the U.S. Army, the site had an airfield with two 11,800' runways. Engineers deployed aspart of AEF Silver rapidly worked to reinstate the airfield and expedite the arrival of “theheavies,” knowing that each C-5 or C-17 landing brought needed supplies and reducedconvoy risks. “We just continued the superb job the AEF Blue CEs started,” said Lt ColPatrick Ryan, commander of the 332nd ECES, but readying Balad AB to accommodatemission beddown moves from Baghdad International Airport and Tallil AB meant a lot oflong hours of hard work for the troops. Under the direction of the operations flight chief,SMSgt Alwyn Archer, teams from the 170-person strong squadron installed a 14,000'emergency airfield lighting system, two mobile aircraft arresting systems, and a tactical airnavigation system to increase flight safety and sortie rates. The Air Force engineers success-fully merged with their Army counterparts in many areas to form joint teams for explosiveordnance disposal; fire, crash and rescue; and readiness operations. The engineers alsocreated a fitness center, a chapel and dedicated facilities for the library and internet/phonecafes. One of the most welcome additions was the double-tent self-help laundry center. —CMSgt John D. Albaugh, 332nd ECES

A C-5 Galaxy sits on the ramp at Balad Air Base, Iraq. The flight line was recently certified to allow the C-5 and its 270,000pound cargo-carrying capacity to use the airfield, reducing the dependence on ground vehicle convoys for supplies. (photo by SSgtSuzanne M. Jenkins)

SSgt Michael Erb, 506th ECES, wires a control panel whileinstalling the lift station in a tent city at Kirkuk Air Base,Iraq. The 10-member power production shop, under thedirection of MSgt Richard Scheurer, takes care of electricalneeds for the whole base. Unrelenting rainstorms created avery muddy working environment that made even the smalljobs difficult. The 150+ members of the 506th ECESworked every day for the first 60 days and will get no morethan three days off in the first 120 days. According to theircommander, Maj Michael Saunders, the 506th ECES com-pleted contracts worth over $1.5 million in one singlerotation (AEF Silver). MSgt Scheurer, in his third trip toSouthwest Asia since 1993, said, “I’ll never forget this one.It’s the longest, roughest, toughest assignment with the mostwork.” For this deployment, he created a special slogan: “Weperform miracles here everyday.” — photo and text by TSgtJeffrey Williams, 506th ECES/PA

From the Front

Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 21

Air Force Civil Engineers deployed to Southwest Asia continue to

support U.S. missions with their specialized skills.

An explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) team from the 379th ECES recently had to become “archeolo-gists” in their quest for unexploded ordnance (UXO) in Afghanistan. Seven other U.S. and non-U.S. EODteams had tried and failed to pinpoint the UXO’s location beneath an airport taxiway, and their efforts hadcovered the original entry hole. Highly sensitive MK-26 subsurface ordnance locators were initially uselessbecause of interference from metal rebar in the taxiway. Armed with site surveys, intelligence reports, and theirknowledge of ordnance, the 379th EOD team began their “dig” at the presumed site of entry. Using heavyequipment, they removed fill from the hole created from past recovery attempts, encountering rebar andchunks of asphalt for the first 2.5 meters. All metal pieces were located with low-sensitivity detectors and then

removed, including 10 pounds of tail-findebris from the UXO. The team then hand-excavated to find the UXO’s original entrypath almost 4 meters below the surface and,using the MK-26 locator, tracked its route andlikely resting site. Given the go-ahead forrecovering the UXO from its probablelocation, the team used heavy equipment toremove a 5' x 5' square of taxiway and dig ahole to the same depth as the entry-site holebefore starting hand excavation. Just aboutwhere they had predicted, the 379th’s EODteam found the UXO and removed a largeamount of components and materials, includ-ing about 70 pounds of explosive. After alldangerous materials were removed anddisposed of, the runway was turned over fornecessary repairs. — SSgt Brion Blais, 48thCES/CEDMSgt James E. Brewster, 379th ECES, stands at bottom of hole excavated to find the

entry route of UXO located beneath runway in Afghanistan. (U.S. Air Force photo)

Maj Gen L. Dean Fox, The Air Force CivilEngineer, showed his support for the deployedtroops during a recent trip to Southwest Asia.Maj Gen Fox spent time with airmen in severallocations, learning about their experiences. (U.S.Air Force photo)


Technology

As former Operations Flight Chief at KeeslerAFB, Miss., I had to solve a problem with ourhydrant system. A hydrant was opened fortesting but there was no water flow, a puzzlingsituation in a gravity-feed, positive-pressuresystem. Puzzling and possibly dangerous intoday’s security-heightened world, sincecontaminants could be introduced into asystem through a hydrant in which the waterlevel falls below the nozzle.

Some thinking and calculations solved thepuzzle. An abbreviated explanation ispresented here. A more detailed article andsolution (with a calculation template) can beviewed from https://wwwmil.afcesa.af.mil/Directorate/es/ce_magazine/default.html.

Distribution System Characteristics. Water flowwithin the distribution system is governed bythe Conservation of Energy principle:“Energy can be neither created or de-stroyed.” For a gravity-pressurized system,the balance can be calculated using themodified Bernoulli equation (Eq. 1).

Consider a fire hydrant with a 4.5" nozzle.The manufacturer states that the hydrantbore pressure loss is 3 lbs/in2 at a flow rateof 1,000 GPM. Under these conditions, thehydrant stream velocity head is 6.32', and thehydrant bore head loss is 6.92' (i.e., the totalhead at the hydrant bore inlet is 13.24'). Thatvalue will vary as the square of the flow rate.

Now assume the hydrant is fed from a watertank through a 1000'-long pipe, with the tankwater level 150' above the hydrant nozzle. Itfollows that the total head loss from tank tohydrant bore inlet, from all causes, at a flowrate of 1,000 GPM, is 150.00' – 13.24' =136.76'. This is a very large head loss for asmooth pipe with no bends, obstructions ortributary losses, but not uncommon for anactual length of pipe with all those features.

Now consider the same hydrant, fed by thesame tank, but through a 100' long pipe—the total head loss is the same as before(150.00'), but the feed pipe head loss is muchsmaller because the pipe is much shorter, so

much more head is available at the hydrant;therefore the hydrant flow is much larger.Assuming the feed pipe head loss is propor-tional to pipe length, the total head loss at aflow rate of 1,000 GPM would be 13.68 +13.24 = 26.92', much less than the actual150.00'. Therefore, since all head losses areproportional to the square of the flow rate,the actual flow rate through the hydrant 100'from the tank will be 1,000 GPM, multipliedby the square root of the ratio (150.00/26.92), or 2,361 GPM.

System Analysis. Finally, to explain our particu-lar circumstance, consider a situation involv-ing three hydrants, symmetrically locatedaround a uniform feed loop (Fig. A). Hydrant#2 is at the far end of the loop, 5,280' from awater tank (longest measured length atKeesler), with the tank water level 150' abovethe nozzle. Hydrants #1 and #3 are each 200'closer to the tank, with their nozzles 10' belownozzle #2 (Fig. B). When tested alone,Hydrant #2 produces 1,000 GPM, 500 GPMcoming from each side of the loop. Underthis condition, the feed pipe head loss in eachside of the loop, carrying 500 GPM, is136.76'. Now assume Hydrant #2 is closed,and Hydrants #1 and #3 are both open. Ifthe flow to both hydrants were 500 GPM, thetotal head loss at each hydrant would be131.58' + 3.31' = 134.89', less than 160.00'.Therefore, the flow to each hydrant will be500 GPM, multiplied by the square root ofthe ratio (160.00/134.89), or 545 GPM. Thetotal head at the inlet to Hydrants #1 and #3will be 3.93', 6.07' below Nozzle #2. Thiscondition obviously creates the opportunity tointroduce a contaminant into Nozzle #2.

Limitations. The examples presented here areintended only for approximating staticpressures on gravity feed water distributionsystems—no accounting is made for boosterpumps, fire pumping or energy extractingdevices such as turbines. Results obtained aretheoretical and not verified under actual fieldconditions. In addition, continuous turbulentflow is assumed throughout—a reasonableassumption under most conditions—butwith very smooth pipes and low water

Fire Hydrant HydraulicsMaj Thomas A. Adams

HQ AFCESA/CEOK

Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 23

hfzg

vpz

g

vp

cc

++⋅

+=+⋅

+ 1

211

0

200

22 ρρ

Figure A

Figure B

Where:p =static pressure

z =elevationρ =water density ⇒ 62.4 lb

m/ft3

ν =water velocityg

c=gravitational constant ⇒ 32.2 ft/sec2

hƒ=friction loss=Dg

vLf

c ⋅⋅⋅⋅

2

2

ƒ=friction factorL=length of pipeD=pipe diameter

velocities, the flow may become laminar, thusinvalidating these conclusions. Nonetheless,these derivations do provide a reasonablemeans of identifying potential problem areason an installation’s water distribution system.

Conclusions. As it turned out, our problemhydrant was at the end of a dead-end branchline and hydrants were being flushed upstream.The branch line was “looped” and the problemwas resolved. The American Water WorksAssociation recommends a minimum 20 psigstatic line pressure at any point in the systemwith a fire hydrant at full flow. However, asexperienced utilities troops know, this pressureis not always attainable in gravity feed systems.The static pressure parameter should bechecked alongside required flow tests, but ifthere is no direct way to do this for a hydrant atfull flow conditions, the parameter may beestimated based on the manufacturer’s pressureloss data. If this data is unavailable, measurethe pressure at the nearest adjacent fire hydrant.With several other key parameters such ashydrant barrel length, accurate “as-built”drawings, or geospatial coordinates, themeasured pressure can be adjusted to estimatestatic pressure at the full-flow hydrant.

When problem areas are identified, furtherinvestigation is warranted to assess theproblem, and take corrective action, ifneeded. In addition to repair projects, look atthe viability of adding booster pumps or awater tower, increasing the distribution linesize, “looping” the system (if applicable), orcontrolling water usage in high-use areas.Bases should also take proper precautions tomonitor their water systems to preventaccess by unauthorized persons.

Maj Thomas A. Adams is a staff professionalengineer at HQ AFCESA, Tyndall AFB, Fla.

Editor’s Note: Intentionally creating a low systempressure is just one of several potential methods ofattacking the water distribution system. AFCESAwill soon issue a new Engineering Technical Letter(ETL) entitled “Design Recommendations forPotable Water System Security.” It will providephysical security recommendations for all types ofwater distribution systems.

Equation 1

( )A

V&

Hydrants Valves

Branch Lines

1

23

Water Tower

8”

200’ (Typ)

1,000 GPM

6’

Hydrant Valve

3.0 psig loss

1

2

3 4.5” dia.

10’

150’

Water Tower

6”


What do you do when youhave a tent city going up in aland where sewage trucks arealmost non-existent, whenyou want to go “high-tech” ina land of antiquity? Do whatthe 506th Expeditionary CivilEngineer Squadron did atKirkuk AB, Iraq: get on theInternet and find a supplierof a package wastewatertreatment plant on the samecontinent.

MSgt Colin Bayes, a deployedutility superintendent fromthe 22nd CES, McConnellAFB, Kan., searched onlinefor a Turkish supplier whocould deliver a packaged plantcapable of servicing almost3,000 troops. No easy feat withminimal Internet service andno skills in Turkish.

An Army-contracted inter-preter helped communicatethe requirements and options.The toughest part was gettingthe seven tractor-trailer–sizedunits across the Turkishborder, where traffic wasbacked up for miles.

A local contractor placed thenecessary 40’x 70’x 24"con-crete pad, with oversight byMSgt Marshal Townsend, astructures superintendentdeployed from the 22nd CES.“Prime BEEFers don’t usuallyget to do this type of con-struction, especially this earlyin a beddown,” MSgtTownsend said.

TSgt John Heisner from the37th CES, Lackland AFB,Texas, went to Istanbul for

training and became the“resident expert” for thesystem. According to him,many sizes are available,beginning with a 600-person-capable unit..

For just $270,000 we wentfrom slit latrines to an aerobicwaste treatment plant in 120days and called it the “luck ofKirkuk” that it all fell in toplace so quickly. Our “out-of-the-box” approach to solvingproblems of both gray waterand sewage disposal for a tentcity removed the need for asewage lagoon, which reducedland requirements. Moreimportantly, it eliminatedforce protection issues relatedto taking sewage off base,which is done at most basesin this area of responsibility.

Prime BEEFers “Package” Wastewater with a Tent City Treatment Plant

Lt Col Tracey WalkerDDEM

Eglin AFB, Fla.

Hill AFB recently entered into a 20-yearEnergy Savings Performance contract withExelon Federal Services Group for the firstAir Force landfill-gas-to-energy project. Thisis also the first Department of Defenseimplementation of the Department ofEnergy’s Biomass and Alternative MethaneFuel program.

Using landfill gas from nearby DavisCounty Landfill, this project is designed toprovide the base with a guaranteed supplyof low-cost electricity from a renewableresource and give it protection againstrising costs. Hill’s Energy ManagementTeam, DOE, Exelon, Utah State EnergyOffice and Davis County developed thedesign and financial details that enabledthe project to move forward in less thansix months.

Methane gas will be used to generate 1.2megawatts-per-hour of reliable energy that

will be independent from the local gridsystem. There are several financial benefitsfrom the project:

1. No up-front capital costs to theAir Force

2. Reportable energy consumptionreduced by 3 percent

3. Approximately $600,000 annualsavings in energy costs, which willmore than pay for the project overthe life of the contract

The environmental benefits are also signifi-cant. The base will use less coal-producedpower, saving more than 75,000 tons of coalannually. This will result in annual airemissions of nitrous oxide, carbon monox-ide and sulfur dioxide being reduced by 5.5tons, 4.8 tons and 19.7 tons, respectively.

Lt Col Mark Kramer75 CEG/CC

Hill AFB, Utah

Hill AFB’s Landfill-to-Energy Project Is DoD First

Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 25

Construction Notes

After taking advantage of the Air Force’sProductivity Enhancing Capital Investment(PECI) program to purchase a new pavingmachine, engineers from the 15th CivilEngineer Squadron’s Heavy Repair Elementput it to use in a project with dual purposes:meeting security requirements and providingmore parking.

Many parking spaces on Hickam AFB wereeliminated to meet recommended anti-terrorism/force stand-off distances of up to25 meters. On such a small base anticipatinga population growth from the C-17 beddownmission in FY06, improved parking was aprimary concern, so Pavements and Equip-ment operators from the 15th CES HeavyRepair Element undertook two mainprojects: converting an open field into a new,functional parking lot, and then repairing anexisting parking lot.

Creating the new parking lot meant demol-ishing a dilapidated concrete basketball court,removing 1,800 tons of topsoil and buildingthe construction site up in lifts with morethan 2,500 tons of recycled base course. Theteam preserved a huge 60-year-old Banyantree by hand-forming the entire curb andgutter around it. Ninety days after construc-tion began, the team placed 900 tons ofasphalt in a single 14-hour day. After 4,263man-hours and $366.5K in materials, the basehad a new lot with 111 parking spaces.

The troops then began repair efforts to theadjacent parking lot, removing failed pave-ment and preparing the base for new asphalt.

Over 1,000 feet of new curb was installed,and topsoil recycled from the first projectwas used to beautify areas around affectedfacilities and match the existing landscape.After just 90 days of preparatory repairefforts, the engineers placed more than 1,000

tons of new asphalt in a 16-hour day tocomplete the project.

While many of the 15th CES team memberswere deployed as part of AEF Blue during theconstruction, SSgt Lepley and his 30-personteam worked extra hard to meet the challengescreated by decreased manpower. “We lovethis,” said SSgt Lepley. “There is nothing betterthan being out here seeing the final product, nomatter how many hours we work.”

SMSgt Jerry Lewis is the Heavy Repair Chief forthe 15th CES, Hickam AFB, Hawaii.

Productivity Enhancing Capital Investment Program

The Air Force Productivity Enhancing Capital Investment (PECI) program has two types of capital investmentfunds: the Fast Payback Capital Investment Fund, or FASCAP, (projects ≤$200,000; payback ≤2 yrs) and theProductivity Investment Fund, or PIF (projects >$200,000; payback <4yrs). Using PECI allowed PACAF toleverage limited manpower and funding to work “smarter” and complete a range of productivity improvements.

For general information, see the AF PECI website at https://www.dp.hq.af.mil/dpm/peci/or go to thePACAF/CEOO website for examples of AF Form 2288s for CE projects: https://www.hqpacaf.af.mil/ce/ceoindx/ceoo/PECI/pacaf_peci_websites.htm. — CMSgt Troy Wiitala, HQ PACAF

New Paver Put To Good Use

SSgt BrianLawrence, SSgtGreg Cahill, andSSgt Chad Lepleyof the 15th CESlay down hot asphalton a parking lot atHickam AFB,Hawaii. Used onseveral projects, thepaving machine hassaved the base over$700,000.(photo courtesy15th CES)

SMSgt Jerry Lewis15th CES/CEOR


The 819th RED HORSE Squadron recentlydeployed to Ellsworth AFB, S.D. to raise thewalls of the new Base Information TransferCenter (BITC) facility using a product thatmade their task go faster and more effi-ciently—insulated concrete forms (ICFs).

The BITC handles the delivery and sorting ofall official mail on base, and was recentlyrelocated to a stand-alone facility away fromhigh-population areas for security reasons.

The new facility has two features which arefirsts for the Air Force: a containment roomwith 12"-thick concrete walls for suspectedexplosive devices, and an emergency showerwith a 400-gallon, rubber-lined containment pitfor suspected chemical or biological agents.

Initial design of the building called for twocourses of 8" x 8" x 16" concrete masonryunits (CMUs) to be installed next to each other,with a 4" air cavity between them to act as anair barrier/insulator. To expedite construction,the 819th RHS got approval to use ICFs inplace of the inner course of CMUs.

An ICF consists of two separate sheets ofpolystyrene foam, varying in thickness from1½" up to 2½", which are held together byinternal webbing made of either plastic or steel.The webbing serves threepurposes: it holds the foamsheets apart at a desired thickness(4"-24"); it helps vibrate theconcrete during pouring, so thatair is reduced and the aggregateconsolidates and settles moreuniformly; and it extends to thefaces of the blocks at evenlyspaced points, providinganchors for interior andexterior wall finishes.

For the BITC, two types of block-form (flatwall) ICFs were used; they differed primarilyby type of locking system for assembly andby internal webbing.

The interlocking ICF was chosen for the 12"-thick concrete walls of the interior contain-ment room. This hexagonal ICF fits togetherlike Legotm building blocks. Workers unpackedthe individual sheets; clipped the plasticwebbing together to the desired width; andthen slid the webbing into embedded cleatson the inside walls of the polystyrene sheets.This particular ICF can be set to any desired

A Well-Formed IdeaCapt Robert Baran

MSgt Larry Lenneman 819th RHS

Above right: Windows were framed intothis exterior wall. Below right: ICFs weresometimes formed off site and carried intoposition. (photos courtesy 819th RHS)

ICFs speed the

construction

process

Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 27

width by changing the size of webbing in theform, giving designers greater flexibility inconcrete wall dimensions.

The tongue-and-groove ICF was chosen forthe main structure of the building becauseits connection method was found to be moresecure; it also had 18-gauge steel webbing on6" centers, giving greater flexibility formounting interior/exterior finishes. Thistype of ICF came pre-assembled in blocksthat measured 24" x 48" with an interioropening of 8" for concrete.

Both systems are easy to cut and shape withhand or power saws. As the ICFs are stacked,window and door openings are cut into placeusing a block-out system: a plastic runnerwraps around the ICF and can be cut andshaped to match the opening. Once in place,the system is braced with wood beforepouring concrete. The plastic runner acts asan anchoring point when installing thewindow or doorframes. Electrical and utilitylines can be installed flush by grooving outthe foam behind the interior finish.

The foam acts as an insulation and acousticalbarrier. The 5" of foam in the ICFs used atEllsworth will give an insulating value ofR-45 or better, making it significantly quieter,considering the proximity to the airfield.

The unique feature of using ICFs for vertical concreteforming is that they are the forms and they stay in place afterpouring. In regular vertical concrete forming, crews have toerect the forms and brace them, pour the concrete, thenremove and clean the forms. Crews still have to brace theICFs but from one side only instead of both, and the bracingsystem comes with many attachments such as scaffoldingbrackets and adjustable turnbuckles to keep walls plumb.

The 819th RHS team erected and braced a 44' x 70' x 10' ICFstructure in just four days, including reinforcement steelplaced horizontally every 2' and vertically every 4'. Because ofthe speed at which the inner bearing walls were set using theICF construction method, it became just a matter of settingthe trusses, the roof decking, and the metal roofing system,which meant multiple crews could work inside and outsidesimultaneously.

Finishing of the BITC was similar to other concreteprojects. J-bolts were set into the concrete to secure the topplates, providing a nailing surface for the roof trusses and atransition to the structural concrete wall, which in turn bearsthe weight of the entire roof assembly. The integratedwebbing of the ICFs takes the place of internal stick frameconstruction for attaching the interior finish. A block veneeranchoring system was attached directly to the ICFs. Theseanchors used hinged clips, which were set into the mortarjoints of the exterior block, helping space the 2" air cavitydesigned into the facility.

Capt Robert Baran is Project Engineer and MSgt Larry Lenneman isProject Manager, 819th RHS, Malmstrom AFB, Mont.

Left: The diagramillustrates types ofwalls formed bydifferent ICFs. Flatwalls are made withblock ICFs (usesthe most concrete).Grid walls aremade with plankICFs. The screengrid wall issometimes knownas ‘post and beam,’and is made withpanel ICFs (usesthe least concrete).

Flat wall core with foam in place Waffle grid core with foamremoved for clarity

Screen grid core with foamremoved for clarity

courtesy of the Portland Cement Association, 2001


Patrick D. AbbottAndrew C. BabichStacy G. BallewDavid A. CassinoGary M. CoumbsCevin R. CoxWilliam E. FerencKeith D. FinneyTimothy D. HulmeLawrence B. JanuaryDavid W. Linde

John E. LittleDonald H. NelsonRian S. PeacemanDan Red CloudPaul R. RushinDaniel I. SacksMichael A. SchreckJeffrey C. SlocumFrazier S.J. SpeaksJoseph R. ThompsonMark A. Campbell

Ivan L. GodwinEric W. MortensenTodd W. NielsenKevin N. RemediesEdward J. RouvetRobert R. InmanJames M. PetreeSteven J. ReedMarita S. Woods

Chief MasterSergeant

Allen J. BenefieldTimothy L. BooneWilliam S. BradshawHarry Briesmaster IIINicholas L. DesportJohn L. Eunice IIIRobert L. FantAnthony A. FotiDonald L. GleasonMichael W. HutchisonDennis L. Jasinski

Sally D. MaconMichael K. MyersMohsen ParhizkarEdward PiekarczykThomas D. QuasneyJon A. RoopMichael J. SmietanaChristopher J. ThelenKeith F. YaktusRobert E. Moriarty

Colonel

Major Aaron D. AltwiesBrian D. BenterOscar I. BetancourtDaniel A. BlackChad B. BondurantKyle D. BrownPatrick J. CarleyLance D. ClarkThomas L. Defazio, Jr.Mark S. DonnithornePhillip R. DonovanMarc L. DouviaKevin W. DunlopMathew T. DustonJohn G. EggersDerek R. FerlandCrissie D. FitzgeraldKirk A. FolkChristopher K. Fuller

Celiann M. GonzalezAndrea R. GriffinJohn A. HanrahanColby D. HoefarMichael J. JohnsonDonald A. JonesDwight F. JunioWilliam H. KaleDee J. KatzerJuan A. KaysMatthew D. KovichBrian W. MacdonaldGeorge J. MatusakSarah F. MaynardSteven W. McCollumFrancis J. Mondo, JrAndre F. MooreLynn R. MoriartyJohn D. Norton

James R. PalmerGregory T. ReichDavid A. ReynoldsJose L. Rivera-HernandezJerry D. SanchezJohn D. SchuligerPaul T. SilasMichael R. StaplesJoseph M. TaylorDouglas F. TippetLance F. TurnerTroy M. TwesmeTerrence L. WalterDavid M. WarnkeJay A. WelbornJeffrey J. WhiteKevin L. WilliamsChaz M. Williamson

CE World

Selected for Promotion

Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 29

Recent A-GramsSix A-Grams were released in the first quarter of 2004. Visit the AFCESAWeb site (http://www.afcesa.af.mil/library/ , under the Periodicals link).

04-01 Full Spectrum Threat Response (FSTR) Web Site Now On AF Portal04-02 Ricin: Background Info, References & Resources04-03 Deployable Power Generation & Distribution System MEP 810A

Training Opportunities04-04 Engineering Prime BEEF Equipment and Training (1 of 2)04-05 Engineering Prime BEEF Equipment and Training (2 of 2)04-06 AF WMD Installation Training & Exercise Program

Available under the “Publications and Policy” link at:http://www.afcesa.af.mil/library/index.asp

ETL 03-4, Alternate Fuels E85 and B20

ETL 03-5, Converting Civil Engineering Radio Frequency Devices toNarrowband Technology

ETL 04-6, Inspection of Drainage Systems

ETL 04-8, Stone Matrix Asphalt (SMA) for Air Force Pavements

Capt Rockie K. Wilson (photoat right, center) has been namedthe Air Force representativefor National Engineers Week’sNew Faces in Engineeringrecognition program.

Captain Wilson is theengineering flight com-mander for the 374th CivilEngineer Squadron, YokotaAB, Japan. He received thehonor in part because of hisrole in helping implement a$130 million annual con-struction program and a$647 million host-nation–funded program at Yokota

Officer Receives National Engineering Honor

AB, Japan. He also helpedmanage a $260 millionprogram to replace fourmaintenance hangars on thebase through host-nationconstruction funding.

Eleven other engineers fromindustry, government and themilitary were also nominatedfor the honor. Nomineeswere honored duringNational Engineer’s Week,Feb. 22-28, and were featuredin USA Today that week.

New Faces in Engineering issponsored by the National

Engineers Week Committeeand corporate affiliates.

Technical Publications

30 AIR FORCE CIVIL ENGINEER30 AIR FORCE CIVIL ENGINEER

Outstanding Civil EngineerUnit Award and The Societyof American MilitaryEngineers Curtin Award

Large Unit52nd CES, Spangdahlem AB,Germany (USAFE)99th CES, Nellis AFB, Nev.(ACC)Small Unit27th CES, Cannon AFB, N.M.(ACC)31th CES, Aviano AB, Italy(USAFE)Air Reserve Component11th CES, Sioux Falls, S.D.(ANG)439th CES, Chipcopee, Mass.(AFRC)

Brigadier General MichaelA. McAuliffe Award(Housing Flight)

3rd CES, Elmendorf AFB,Alaska (PACAF)9th CES, Beale AFB, Calif. (ACC)

Major General Robert C.Thompson Award(Resources Flight)

3rd CES, Elmendorf AFB,Alaska (PACAF)775th CES, Hill AFB, Utah(AFMC)

Brigadier General Archie S.Mayes Award (EngineeringFlight)

92nd CES, Fairchild AFB,Wash. (AMC)65th CES, Lajes Field, Azores(USAFE)

Major General Clifton D.Wright Award (OperationsFlight)

7th CES, Dyess AFB, Texas(ACC)786th CES, Ramstein AB,Germany (USAFE)

Chief Master SergeantRalph E. Sanborn Award(Fire Protection Flight)

1st CES, Langley AFB, Va.(ACC)30th CES, Vandenberg AFB,Calif. (AFSPC)

Senior Master SergeantGerald J. Stryzak Award(Explosive OrdnanceDisposal Flight)

43rd CES, Pope AFB, N.C.(AMC)56th CES, Luke AFB, Ariz.(AETC)

Colonel Frederick J. RiemerAward (Readiness Flight)Active Duty Category8th CES, Kunsan AB, Repub-lic of Korea (PACAF)52nd CES, Spangdahlem AB,Germany (USAFE)Air Reserve Command Category114th CES, Sioux Falls, S.D.(ANG)913th CES, Willow Grove ARS,Pa. (AFRC)

Environmental Flight Award45th CES, Patrick AFB, Fla.(AFSPC)325th CES, Tyndall AFB, Fla.(AETC)

Society Of AmericanMilitary Engineers NewmanMedal (Officer Category)

Col Brian L. Miller, HQ AMC,Scott AFB, Ill. (AMC)Lt Col Donald L. Gleason, HQUSAFE, Ramstein AB, Germany(USAFE)

Society Of AmericanMilitary Engineers GoddardMedal (Enlisted Category)

Active DutyMSgt Stanley R. Gilmore,52nd CES, Spangdahlem AB,Germany (USAFE)

SMSgt Andrew C. Babick,341st CES, Malmstrom AFB,Mont. (AFSPC)

Air Force ReserveSMSgt Ronald W. Wood-ward, 916th CES, SeymourJohnson AFB, N.C. (AFRC)

MSgt Pamela J. Stokes, HQAFCESA, Tyndall AFB, Fla.(AFCESA)

Air National GuardSMSgt Lawrence C. Jones,179th CES, Mansfield-LahmANGB, Mansfield, Ohio –co-winner (ANG)

SMSgt Gerard A. Tembrock,136th CES, Carswell NASJRB,Fort Worth, TX – co-winner(ANG)

CMSgt John M. Kuykendall,HQ AMC, Scott AFB, Ill. (AMC)

Major General Joseph A.Ahearn Enlisted LeadershipAward

CMSgt Wayne E. QuattroneII, 314th CES, Little RockAFB, Ark. (AFSPC)

CMSgt Rodney E. Coleman,21st CES, Peterson AFB, Colo.(AETC)

The Harry P. Rietman Award(Senior Civilian Manager)Mr. Ronald R. Daniels, 92ndCES, Fairchild AFB, Wash.(AMC)

Mr. Robert M. Schultz, 775thCES, Hill AFB, Utah (AFMC)

Major General Augustus M.Minton Award (OutstandingAir Force Civil Engineermagazine article)

Capt Ryan J. Novotny, 819thRHS, Malmstrom AFB, Mont.(AFSPC)

Maj Anthony J. Davit, 56th CES,Luke AFB, Ariz. (AETC)

The 2003 Air ForceEngineer Awards werepresented Feb. 24,during National Engi-neers Week, at the 42ndannual Civil EngineerAwards Luncheon,Bolling AFB, Washing-ton, D.C. The Balchen/Post winner will berecognized at the 38thannual InternationalAviation Snow Sympo-sium, May 8-12, inBuffalo, N.Y. Winners areshown here in boldface.

2003 Air Force2003 Air Force2003 Air Force2003 Air Force2003 Air Force2003 Air Force2003 Air Force2003 Air Force2003 Air Force2003 Air Force

Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 31Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 31

Major General William D.Gilbert AwardOfficerMaj Aaron Young, HQUSAFE, Ramstein AB,Germany (USAFE)

Maj Charles D. Kuhl, HQ AETC,Randolph AFB, Texas (AETC)EnlistedMSgt Danny Pelkey, HQANG, Andrews AFB, Md.(ANG)

SMSgt Samuel C. Hazzard, HQAFSPC, Peterson AFB, Colo.(AFSPC)

CivilianMr. John F. Faulkner, HQAFSPC, Peterson AFB, Colo.(AFSPC)

Mr. Juan A. Perez, HQ AFMC,Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio(AFMC)

Major General Eugene A.Lupia AwardMilitary ManagerCapt Christopher K. Fuller,18th CES, Kadena AB, Japan(PACAF)

Capt William H. Kale III, 819thRHS, Malmstrom AFB, Mont.(AFSPC)

Military TechnicianTSgt Joseph R. Jenkins, 35thCES, Misawa AB, Japan(PACAF)

SSgt John F. Dziok, 43rd CES,Pope AFB, N.C. (AMC)

Chief Master Sergeant LarryR. Daniels Award(Outstanding MilitarySuperintendent)

MSgt Daniel B. Jessup, 16thCES, Hurlburt Field, Fla.(AFSOC)

SMSgt Timothy D. Hulme,823rd RHS, Hurlburt Field, Fla.(ACC)

Outstanding Civil EngineerSenior Military ManagerLt Col David W. Funk, HQPACAF, Hickam AFB, Hawaii(PACAF)

Col Thurlow E. Crummett,819th RHS, Malmstrom AFB,Mont. (AFSPC)

Outstanding Civil EngineerCivilian ManagerMr. Paul Degner, 3rd CES,Elmendorf AFB, Alaska(PACAF)

Mr. John R. Fox, 21st CES,Peterson AFB, Colo. (AFSPC)

Outstanding Civil EngineerCivilian SupervisorMr. Paul Wagner, 86th CES,Ramstein AB, Germany(USAFE)

Ms. Lisa M. Mata, 9th CES,Beale AFB, Calif. (ACC)

Outstanding Civil EngineerCivilian TechnicianMr. Antonio A. Avila, 65thCES, Lajes Field, Azores(USAFE)

Mr. Billy D. Clemons, 347thCES, Moody AFB, Ga. (AFSOC)

Outstanding Civil Engineer(Air Reserve component)Officer ManagerLt Col Anthony Desimone,HQ USAFE, Ramstein AB,Germany (USAFE)

Maj Jeffery S. Barnett, 810thCEF, NASJRB, Ft. Worth, Texas(AFRC)

Senior Non-CommissionedOfficer ManagerCMSgt Jimmy M. Sinks,314th CES, Little Rock AFB,Ark. (AETC)

SMSgt Scott H. Duncan, 21stCES, Peterson AFB, Colo.(AFSPC)

Non-Commissioned OfficerManagerTSgt Stephen J. Burns, HQAFCESA, Tyndall AFB, Fla.(AFCESA)

SSgt Steven Laporte, 366thCES, Mt. Home AFB, Idaho(ACC)

Outstanding CommunityPlannerMr. Carl T. Hoffman, 16thCES, Hurlburt Field, Fla.(AFSOC)

Ms. Denise Webb, 99th CES,Nellis AFB, Nev. (ACC)

Balchen/Post Award (SnowAnd Ice Removal)305th CES, McGuire AFB, N.J.(AMC)341st CES, Malmstrom AFB,Mont. (AFSPC)

2003 Air Force NationalSociety Of ProfessionalEngineers Federal EngineerOf The Year

MilitaryMaj Monte S. Harner,35th CES, Misawa AB,Japan (PACAF)

CivilianMs. Nancy J. Manley,778th CES, RobinsAFB, Ga. (AFMC)

Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 31

Civil Engineer AwardsCivil Engineer AwardsCivil Engineer AwardsCivil Engineer AwardsCivil Engineer AwardsCivil Engineer AwardsCivil Engineer AwardsCivil Engineer AwardsCivil Engineer AwardsCivil Engineer Awards


sW

Saving energy and money while helping the environmentearned the Air Force several Federal Energy and Water Man-agement Awards this year. The awards, sponsored by the U.S.Department of Energy’s (DOE) Federal Energy ManagementProgram (FEMP), are given annually to recognize outstandingcontributions toward increased energy efficiency, renewableenergy and water conservation within the federal sector. TheAir Force winners in each category are listed below.

2003 Federal Energy and Water Management Awards(six winners)

Water Conservation, Small GroupThe Water Conservation Group, 7th Bomb Wing, Dyess AFB,Texas. Group members include Mr. Tom Denslow, Mr. DwainWadlington, Mr. Ron Miller and Ms. Deb McGrath.

Alternative Finance, IndividualCapt Harry W. Jackson, Deputy Chief of the 47th Civil EngineerOperations Flight, Laughlin AFB, Texas

Renewable Energy, Small GroupThe Renewable Energy Purchase Group, Edwards AFB, Calif.Group members include Mr. Paul Weaver, Mr. Mike Keeling, andMs. Amy Hoffer from Edwards, along with Mr. Michael Santoroand Maj Jeff Renshaw from Headquarters Air Force CivilEngineer Support Agency (HQ AFCESA), Tyndall AFB, Fla.

Energy Efficiency/Energy Management, IndividualMr. George Lopez, Base Energy Manager from the 89th CivilEngineer Squadron, Andrews AFB, Md.Water Conservation, OrganizationThe 15th CES, Hickam AFB, Hawaii

Water Conservation, IndividualMr. Michael X. Clawson, Water Manager at HQ AFCESA, TyndallAFB, Fla.

2003 Federal Energy Saver Showcase Award (six winners)

To promote wise energy and water use throughout the federalgovernment, agencies are showcasing cost-effective technolo-gies in their facilities that enhance energy efficiency, waterconservation, and renewable energy use. Since 1995, FEMP hasrecognized more than 100 facilities across the country as

Federal Energy Saver Showcases. 2003 Air Force base winners(with Major Command) include Dyess AFB, Texas (ACC),Laughlin AFB, Texas (AETC), Fairchild AFB, Wash. (AMC), GrandForks AFB, N.D. (AMC), McConnell AFB, Kan. (AMC) and TravisAFB, Calif. (AMC).

2003 Presidential Award For Leadership In FederalEnergy Management

The Air Force winner of this DOE award is the Energy ProjectTeam from the 7th BW, Dyess AFB, Texas; HQ ACC, Langley AFB,Va.; and HQ AFCESA, Tyndall AFB, Fla. They were chosen fromnominees using the criteria of implementation, institutionaliza-tion, outreach, and results. Team members include Lt ColDarren Daniels, Mr. Tom Denslow, Ms. Deb McGrath, Mr. RonMiller, and Mr. Dwain Wadlington from Dyess; Mr. Willis Barrowand Mr. Steve Dumont from HQ ACC; and Mr. Tim Adams, Mr.Michael Santoro, and Ms. Lynda Sisk from HQ AFCESA. Theawardees were honored in a ceremony at the White House onOct. 30, 2003.This award was established to recognize outstanding energymanagement for contributions to successful federal energymanagement.

USAF Spring 2004 “You Have The Power” Energy Champion

Using a set of modified DOE FEMP criteria, the Air Forceselected Capt Harry W. Jackson of Laughlin AFB, Texas, as theirawardee/nominee. DOE FEMP recognizes the “You Have thePower” Energy Champion awardees from federal agencies andDOD branches for their outstanding achievements in theconservation/efficient use of energy. A poster of the USAFEnergy Champion was published and distributed by DOE FEMPto major commands and bases for April’s “Earth Day” and wasposted on the FEMP Web site.

For more information on the DOE FEMP awards program,contact Pat Mumme, Air Force Facility Energy Program Man-ager, at HQ AFCESA: [email protected], DSN 523-6361or commercial 850-283-6361.

Mr. Kevin Wahlstrom, HQ AFCESA Energy Awareness,Tyndall AFB, Fla.

Air Force Energy, Water ManagersEarn DOE Awards

Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 33

The Alaska Water and Wastewater Manage-ment Association recently recognized twoemployees of Eielson AFB’s 354th CivilEngineer Squadron. Ms. Terri Hobbs, Waste-water Treatment Plant Operator, was namedthe Large Wastewater Operator of the Yearand Mr. Malcolm Nason, Water SystemsSuperintendent, was named the Manager ofthe Year. One of the few remaining Air Force-owned and -operated utilities, the base’s waterand wastewater works was named the LargeWater System and Large Wastewater System ofthe Year in both 2002 and 2003. The waste-water treatment plant also received an EPAnational Clean Water Act Recognition Award in2003 for Operations and Maintenance Excel-lence in the Large, Non-Discharging category.

A raging fire recently deci-mated 30 acres of forest in 12hours at MacDill AFB, Fla.The good news is that wasthe whole idea.

“The purpose of the prescribedburn was two-fold,” said JeffSprinkmann, a contractor withthe 6th Civil EngineerSquadron’s environmental flight.“First and foremost it reducedthe possible dangers that awildfire can produce. Secondly,fire is essential in maintainingthe balance between the vinesand undergrowth of the forest.”Many plants only release theirseeds when the high tempera-tures of a fire trigger them.

Minimizing smoke received toppriority during planning, butMother Nature had otherplans; the entire on-basecampground was shrouded insmoke for most of the day.

In preparation for the burn, the6th CES cleared a firebreak tothe south, providing extra

protection to the campground.Lewis Lake and Marina BayDrive provided breaks to thenorth and west, and a mangrovecanal provided a break to theeast. Squadron firefighters andstaff were onsite until 11 p.m.,when only tiny smoldering piles

of ash were left where there hadonce been abundant growth.

In four or five years, most ofthe vegetation, which growsrapidly in the humid, subtropi-cal climate of Florida, will beback just as thick.

“Spring Cleaning” Heats Up for 6th CES

Jason Kirkpatrick, a contractor with the6th CES, ensures that the prescribedburn is under control.

Ms. Hobbs and Mr. Nason review plans for Eielson’s 2004 Repair Lagoon Linerproject with SSgt Edward Fitzgerald. (photo by A1C Rachel E. Walters)

Text and photo by SSgt RandyRedman, 6th Air Mobility WingPublic Affairs, MacDill AFB, Fla.

Alaska Recognizes Eielson Employees


The Force Protection program will soon unveilits latest tool for engineers and force protectionspecialists. The Anti-Terrorism/ForceProtection Information/Technology Web sitewill provide information focusing on planning,design, and construction for security andprotection of DoD facilities.

Content includes design and constructionstandards and criteria; expert guidance; testdata; DoD points of contact with expertise ineach technology area; searchable databases;design support tools; worked examples of keyproblems; and computer-based training.Some areas contain detailed guidance ondesign principles, requirements, and equa-tions. Vendors and manufacturers can postinformation about products they offer ineach technology area. Designers can examinespecifications; installation and maintenancerequirements; product costs; and perfor-mance and test data.

The Air Force Force Protection Battlelab andthe Naval Facilities Engineer Command(NAVFAC) are jointly developing the site. TheDefense Technical Information Center willhost it. Security Engineering Working Group,U.S. Cost, Applied Research Associates,AFCESA and the Defense Threat ReductionAgency (DTRA) all provide support. Work onthe site and its content will continue after it’sinitial public opening. AFCESA, NAVFAC,U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and DTRAcontinue to develop computer-based trainingmodules and content.

Located at https://sewg.dtic.mil, public accessto the site is planned for August 2004.Consult the AFCESA Web site athttp://www.afcesa.af.mil for any late-breakingdevelopments.

For more information , e-mail the author [email protected].

AT/FP Web Site Unveiled

The Automated CivilEngineer System (ACES)provides direct Civil Engi-neer information manage-ment to more than 200 activeAir Force units, the AirNational Guard, and the AirForce Reserve. Accurate real-time work managementinformation, combined withfinancial information,supports the customer in alloperational environments.

ACES applications are underdevelopment at Maxwell-Gunter AFB, Ala., and Web-based training is underdevelopment at HQAFCESA, Tyndall AFB, Fla.Visit http://aces.afcesa.af.milfor the currently availabletraining: Personnel and

Readiness,Real Prop-erty, andProgram

Management. The Housingmodule’s training should becomplete by August 2004.Additional training will includethe Explosive OrdnanceDisposal, Furnishings Manage-ment Office, and Fire Depart-ment modules.

Based on actual tasks, thetraining teaches users how todo their jobs, rather than justexplaining the componentsof the program. Users aren’tforced to progress from onetask to another; they canaccess tasks and subtasks asneeded. This flexibility makesthe training useful for bothinitial learning and review.Bookmarks and colored linkshelp users navigate their waythrough the training.

Narration and Flash anima-tions let the user focus on thetask demonstration ratherthan having to read throughexplanations during theactivity. Media controls let theuser play, pause, stop, andreplay the animations and theaudio. Transcripts of theaudio are also available.

Lesson overviews, learningobjectives, and summariesassist in learning and reten-tion. Other resources includea glossary, a frequently askedquestions page, and an e-maillink to send comments toAFCESA. Currently, practiceexercises and quizzes arebeing developed to helpreinforce and evaluate whatthe user has learned.

Contact Dr. Viki Bowen at850-283-6381 (DSN 523-6381)for more information.

Fistful of ACES

Lt Col Craig RutlandHQ AFCESA

Tyndall AFB, Fla.

Mr. Jeff ColemanHQ AFCESA

Tyndall AFB, Fla.

Training & Education

Vol. 12 • No. 1 • 2004 35

366th Training Squadron

Resident courses are offeredat Wright-Patterson AFB,Ohio. Registration beginsapproximately 90 days inadvance. Students shouldregister for CESS coursesthrough the online regis-tration process. Registrationfor the satellite offerings(marked with an ‘S’) closes25 days before broadcast.For satellite registration,course information, or acurrent list of class dates,visit the CESS website at:http://www.afit.edu.

AFIT

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

Ft. Leonard Wood MO

Indian Head MD

Gulfport MS

Sheppard AFB TX

Wright-Patterson AFB OHCourse No. Title Off. Start Dates Grad DatesENG 520 Comprehensive Planning Development 04A/04B 19-Jul/02-Aug 30-Jul/06-AugENG 440 (S) Roofing Design & Mgmt 04A 23-Aug 27-AugENG 555 (S) Airfield Pavement Construction Inspection 04B 30-Aug 03-SepENV 020 (S) Environmental Compliance Assessment 04C 26-Jul 29-JulENV 220 (S) Unit Environmental Coordinator 04C 13-Sep 17-SepENV 222 (S) Hazardous Material Mgmt. Process (HMMP)04C 03-Aug 05-AugENV 419 Environmental Planning, Prog. & Budgeting04C 20-Jul 22-JulMGT 101 Intro to the BCE Organization 04C 06-Jul 28-AugMGT 102 Intro to the BCE Organization/Reserves 04B 23-Aug 03-SepMGT 421 (S) Contracting for Civil Engineering 04B 02-Aug 13-AugMGT 422 (S) Project Management 04A 19-Jul 23-JulMGT 424 (S) Real Property Management 04A 26-Jul 30-JulMGT 484 Reserve Forces Air Base Combat Eng. 04B 07-Sep 17-SepMGT 570 Civil Engineer Superintendent O4C/O4D 19-Jul/23 Aug 30-Jul/03-SepMGT 580 CE Advanced 04B 13-Sep 17-SepSeminar (Web) Stormwater 04C 01-Jul 01-JulSeminar (S) Hazardous Material Management 04C 03-Aug 03-AugSeminar (Web) HW Accum Site/Init Pt Mgmt 04C 19-Aug 19-Aug

Course No. Title Start Dates End DatesJ3ARR3E453-002 Pest Management Re-Certification 12-Jul/09-Aug 16-Jul/13-AugJ3AZR3E051-003 Cathodic Protection 18-Aug 31-AugJ3AZR3E051-007 Airfield Lighting 17-Aug 26-AugJ3AZR3E051-008 Electrical Distribution Sys. Maint. 30-Jul 26-AugJ3AZR3E051-010 Bare Base Electrical Systems 12-Jul 23-JulJ3AZR3E051-012 Fire Alarm Systems 23-Jul/18-Aug 17-Aug/13-SepJ3AZR3E051-013 Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) 18-Aug 07-SepJ3AZR3E052-013 CE Advanced Electronics 12-Jul/16-Aug/22-Sep 06-Aug/13-Sep/20-OctJ3AZR3E071-001 CE Adv. Elec. Troubleshooting 19-Jul/16-Aug 13-Aug/13-SepJ3AZR3E072-002 Troubleshoot. Elec. Power Gen. Eqp. 14-Jul/11-Aug 04-Aug/01-SepJ3AZR3E072-113 Bare Base Power Generation 19-Jul/14-Sep 12-Aug/08-OctJ3AZR3E151-013 HVAC/R Controls Systems 19-Jul/08-Sep 20-Aug/13-OctJ3AZR3E151-014 Direct Expansion Systems 16-Jul/02-Aug/08-Sep 17-Aug/01-Sep/08-OctJ3AZR3E151-015 Indirect Expansion Systems 18-Aug/08-Sep 07-Sep/27-SepJ3AZR3E451-004 Fire Suppression Systems Maint. 19-Jul/16-Aug/13-Sep 06-Aug/03-Sep/01-OctJ3AZR3E471-101 Bare Base Water Purification & Distr. Sys. 07-Jul/18-Aug/15-Sep 16-Jul/27-Aug/24-SepJ3AZR3E472-000 Liq. Fuels Storage Tank Entry Spvsr. 30-Aug/13-Sep 10-Sep/23-SepJ3AZR3E472-001 Liq. Fuels Sys. Maintenance Tech. 02-Aug 13-Aug

J3AZP3E571-003 Engineering Design 16-Aug 27-AugJ3AZP3E571-004 Construction Surveying 19-Jul/02-Aug/13-Sep 30-Jul/13-Aug/24-SepJ3AZP3E571-005 Construction Materials Testing 06-Jul/30-Aug 16-Jul/10-SepJ3AZP3E971-003 Advanced Readiness 26-Jul/16-Aug 30-Jul/20-AugJ3AZP3E971-005 NBC Cell Operations 12-Jul/23-Aug/13-Sep 16-Jul/27-Aug/17-Sep

J5AZN3E871-002 Advanced EOD Course 14-Jul/04-Aug 25-Jul/15-Aug

J3AZP3E351-001 Low Slope Maint. & Repair 23-Aug/13-Sep 02-Sep/23-SepJ3AZP3E351-002 Fabrication Welded Pipe Joints 23-Aug 03-SepJ3AZP3E351-003 Metals Layout Fab. & Welding 13-Jul/02-Aug/13-Sep 30-Jul/19-Aug/30-Sep

Continuing Education

Air Force civil engineers patiently answered“What does that do?” and many morequestions during the annual Engineers’ WeekFamily Day, Feb. 21, in Washington D.C.

Family Day, sponsored by the NationalEngineers’ Week organization, introducesyoung people to engineering through interac-tive, engineer-themed games, activities anddisplays.

Dozens of private and government organiza-tions took part, including the Air Force, whichhad four displays: fire prevention, explosiveordnance disposal, readiness andgeotechnology. Air Force members spentalmost eight hours answering loads ofquestions from the more than 8,500 peoplewho attended this year’s event.“The number one question for us was, ‘Are weusing robots in Iraq?’” said CMSgt JulioMorelos, HQ AFCESA, Tyndall AFB, Fla.,who

coordinated the Air Force EOD team’s display,

which included a remote-controlled robot.

The Air Force’s display drew large numbers

because participants could do more than just

touch the gear; they could also try it on.

“Putting the stuff on gives another perspective

for the kids,” said SSgt Roger Dupuis, a

firefighter with the 436th CES, Dover AFB, Del.

“They get to see that it’s not play equipment, it’s

real, and ‘wow, it’s really heavy.’”

By the time the event was over, the Air Force

teams had been visited by most, if not all, of the

attendees and had patiently answered the

barrage of questions.

“I got tired of standing on my feet, but I loved

answering questions about the career field,” said

MSgt Paul Kull, Det. 63, Air Armament Center,

Indian Head, Md.

Yeah, but can he handle “Are we there yet?”

Answer Me This

Photos and text by MSgt Michael A. Ward, HQ AFCESA/PA, Tyndall AFB, Fla.

volume 12 • no. 1 • 2004 - afcec home force civil engineer command focus air force special...

Documents