Environmental training tackles risks, maximizes Peterson resources

Published April 28, 2009
By Thea Skinner
21st Space Wing Public Affairs

PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. -- During the Earth Day week, Air Force environmental managers joined forces under the new asset management flight to train Airmen in risk management and cost-benefit, amongst other topics, April 21-23.

About 19 environmental coordinators, including eight fence site representatives and counterparts from five GSU sites, converged at the 21st Space Wing Geographically Separated Unit Environmental Coordinator Workshop at the Plaza of the Rockies in Colorado Springs.

The Air Force Civil Engineer Support Agency identified a need for civil engineering personnel to act using similar best practices to the private sector. The merging of the corporate and military practices is an effort to create transparency between the sectors as personnel address environmental projects.

"As corporations do, we will apply risks. It is taking a step back and taking care of that risk, so it does not happen. You want to take care of your people and where you're working from - bringing all components together and maximizing your resources," said Dan Rodriguez, 21st Space Wing Civil Engineer Squadron, Asset Management flight chief.

The bi-annual workshop focused on using the corporate framework, as part of the new civil engineering flight restructuring, coined Civil Engineering Asset Management Flight. The management accounts for project risks and cost-benefit scenarios.

"Part of this is to eliminate the pet projects. In civil engineering we want to make sure we take care of our structures - that we do not violate environmental laws," said Capt. Robert Danyluk, 21 SW CES activity management plan program coordinator.

Training also centered on activity management, bioenvironmental engineering, resource management, pollution prevention and environmental law.

Activity Management Plans:
Activity Management Plans are 10 year plans that provide a certain level of service, said Captain Danyluk.

Implementing the plans is an effort toward influencing funding for environmental projects such as construction on bases. Projects and corresponding components used to allocate resources are prioritized based on a rating scale.

"Peterson has three times as much money for construction," Mr. Rodriguez said. "Civil engineers are working 60 to 80 hours a week to keep up with construction. We are looking on the environmental side to get all of our 2009 projects funded."

Although the plans are presently implemented at bases, GSUs will be integrated at a later date.

"We are in the first six months of an 18 month implementation phase," Captain Danyluk said. "Funding will not be based on square footage, but prioritization."

Benefits abound at workshop:
The centralized workshop training location saved money, because GSU environmental managers were not required to travel elsewhere.

To train elsewhere the cost per GSU is $2,500 and the workshop only involved travel cost, saving about $15,000, Mr. Rodriguez said.

"We are trying to get more out of our travel dollars," Mr. Rodriguez said. "We get more tangible benefits by getting face-to-face contact with coordinators and program managers."

Workshop facilitates dialogue:
The workshop spurred collaboration and dialogue, allowing GSUs to incorporate resources into proposed environmental projects.

Coordinating Peterson representative visits with key environmental activities such as the Environmental Protection Commission and preconstruction meetings at Clear Air Force Station, Alaska, would further enhance communication, said John Moylan, 13th Space Warning Squadron environmental manager at Clear AFS.

"It is a solid approach in relating risk to cost. We spend a lot

of time going after regulatory agencies, but our projects are low on agency's priorities," Mr. Moylan said.

After four years of efforts to obtain a permit to discharge condensate from a steam-line at an industrial source at Clear AFS, the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation stated that issuing a permit was low on the agency's priorities and that no permit would be issued.

The new AMP prioritization rating system will assist in streamlining practices of the corporate world and the Air Force.

AMP findings will be reviewed and reported at an Environmental Safety and Occupational Health Management System Assessment Camp at Peterson in June and at GSU sites in late 2009.