Meeting of the National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force, 68425-68427 [2013-27270]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2013 / Notices
A live Web cast of the Meeting can be
viewed at www.cpsc.gov/live.
For a recorded message containing the
latest agenda information, call (301)
504–7948.
CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Todd A. Stevenson, Office of the
Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product
Safety Commission, 4330 East West
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301)
504–7923.
Dated: November 12, 2013.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013–27390 Filed 11–12–13; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6355–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
[Docket ID: DoD–2013–OS–0208]
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request
ACTION:
Notice.
The Department of Defense
has submitted to OMB for clearance, the
following proposal for collection of
information under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35).
DATES: Consideration will be given to all
comments received by December 16,
2013.
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Fred
Licari, 571–372–0493.
Title,
Associated Form and OMB Number:
Information Assurance Scholarship
Program; OMB Control Number 0704–
TBD.
Type of Request: New.
Number of Respondents: 493.
Responses per Respondent: 1.
Annual Responses: 493.
Average Burden per Response: 15
minutes.
Annual Burden Hours: 123.5 hours.
Needs and Uses: The National
Security Agency (NSA) is the Executive
Administrator of the DoD Information
Assurance Scholarship Program (IASP),
serving on behalf of DoD Chief
Information Officer. Those who wish to
participate in the DoD IASP
Recruitment program must complete
and submit an application package
through their college or university to
NSA. Centers of Academic Excellence in
Information Assurance and Research
(CAEs) interested in applying for
capacity-building grants must complete
and submit a written proposal, and all
colleges and universities subsequently
TKELleY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:20 Nov 13, 2013
Jkt 232001
receiving grants must provide
documentation on how the grant
funding was utilized and the resulting
accomplishments. Without this written
documentation, the DoD has no means
of judging the quality of applicants to
the program or collecting information
regarding program performance. In
addition, the DoD IASP participants and
their faculty advisors (Principal
Investigators) are asked to complete
annual program assessment surveys.
These surveys are collectively reviewed
to assess the program’s effectiveness
from the perspective of the students and
Principal Investigators. The survey
information is used to improve the
program in subsequent years.
Affected Public: Individuals or
households, specifically college
students at institutions designated as
CAEs who are interested in, and qualify
to apply for a scholarship; CAEs
interested in submitting proposals for
capacity-building grants, and faculty
advisors (Principal Investigators).
Frequency: On occasion.
Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary.
OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet
Seehra.
Written comments and
recommendations on the proposed
information collection should be sent to
Ms. Jasmeet Seehra at the Office of
Management and Budget, Desk Officer
for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive
Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.
You may also submit comments,
identified by docket number and title,
by the following method:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name, docket
number and title for this Federal
Register document. The general policy
for comments and other submissions
from members of the public is to make
these submissions available for public
viewing on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov as they are
received without change, including any
personal identifiers or contact
information.
DoD Clearance Officer: Ms. Patricia
Toppings.
Written requests for copies of the
information collection proposal should
be sent to Ms. Toppings at WHS/ESD
Information Management Division, 4800
Mark Center Drive, East Tower, Suite
02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350–3100.
Dated: November 8, 2013.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2013–27250 Filed 11–13–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
68425
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
Meeting of the National Commission
on the Structure of the Air Force
Director of Administration and
Management, DoD.
ACTION: Notice of Advisory Committee
Meeting.
AGENCY:
The Department of Defense is
publishing this notice to announce that
the following Federal advisory
committee closed meeting of the
National Commission on the Structure
of the Air Force (‘‘the Commission’’) has
taken place. Due to difficulties
finalizing the meeting agenda for the
scheduled meeting of the National
Commission on the Structure of the Air
Force for November 12, 2013, this
meeting notice is publishing in the
Federal Register after the date of the
meeting.
SUMMARY:
Dates of Closed Meeting,
including Hearing and Commission
Discussion: Tuesday, November 12,
2013, from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
ADDRESSES: 2521 South Clark Street,
Suite 525, Crystal City, VA 22202 and
a secure video teleconferencing line.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mrs. Marcia Moore, Designated
Federal Officer, National Commission
on the Structure of the Air Force, 1950
Defense Pentagon, Room 3A874,
Washington, DC 20301–1950. Email:
marcia.l.moore12.civ@mail.mil. Desk
(703) 545–9113. Facsimile (703) 692–
5625.
DATES:
Purpose of
Meeting: This meeting was held under
the provisions of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5
U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the
Government in the Sunshine Act of
1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and
41 CFR 102–3.150. This meeting was the
second in a series of three meetings held
for the Commissioners to consider
information and data from a variety of
sources that will be presented and
aggregated by employing several data,
analytic and decision support tools that
contain classified information.
Agenda: The agenda items were:
—The role of airpower in the postAfghanistan national security
situations likely to be encountered by
the Air Force capabilities and Airmen
and the implications for the structure
of the Air Force. This discussion will
be organized into three categories.
The ‘‘Away Game,’’ will involve
emerging demands on Air Force
capabilities such as: Intelligence,
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\14NON1.SGM
14NON1
TKELleY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
68426
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2013 / Notices
Surveillance and reconnaissance,
Remotely Piloted Aircraft, Space,
Cyber, Special Operations, and
Building Partnership Capacity.
Commissioners will also explore the
implications of rising demands and
expectations for the ‘‘Home Game’’ in
missions such as Homeland Defense,
Homeland Security, and Defense
Support to Civil Agencies. This will
include implications for the structure
of the Air Force from the growing
threat of the ‘‘Away Game’’ involving
simultaneous attacks on the
Homeland. The third area of
discussion will be on the continuing
growth of demand on traditional Air
Force core functions including: Air
Superiority, Air Mobility, Global
Precision Attack, Nuclear Deterrence
Operations, Command and Control,
Personnel Recovery, Agile Combat
Support, Training and Education, and
other specific mission sets such as
security forces, civil engineering and
science and technology.
— Projections and assumptions about
future resource levels that will be
available to organize, train and equip
the Air Force. This will include
assumptions about how the Budget
Control Act and Sequestration
legislation will affect Total
Obligational Authority and associated
planning, programming and budgeting
flexibility. Commissioners will also
consider the impact of strategic
choices on Air Force capabilities and
force structure options derived from
the selection of national priorities
among modernization, technology,
recapitalization, readiness, capacity
and force structure. In this discussion
Commissioners will consider the
various approaches to how to
calculate and apply cost methods and
data to questions of force structure.
—The root causes of legislative and
bureaucratic development of the force
structure issues that led to the
creation of the Commission in 2013.
They will consider how these issues
are rooted in the American militia
heritage and the history of the Air
Force since 1947. This discussion will
extend to accounting for the sociocultural dimensions of force structure
issues ranging from the fundamental
relationship of the American people
to their military and to sub-cultures
within the Air Force.
—How to institutionalize the shift in the
fundamental role of the reserve
components from a strategic reserve to
an operational reserve with associated
expectations. Commissioners will also
consider the force mix options they
are prepared to assess in terms of
relative weight of force structure in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:20 Nov 13, 2013
Jkt 232001
each of the components.
Commissioners will consider whether
to recommend that the Department of
Defense invert the force sizing
planning paradigm from sizing to
meet the expected wartime surge to an
approach that begins with the Steady
State Requirement then resource the
components to provide the nation
with a meaningful surge capacity for
the strategy. They will also address
considerations for measuring and
assessing Active, Reserve and Guard
Effectiveness—both cost and mission
effectiveness.
—Alternative approaches to how the
nation should direct, control and
guide the active, reserve and National
Guard Air Forces, including:
Whether, and if so how, to simplify
Title 10, Title 32 and other governing
legislative authorities;
How to re-balance the current mix of
Active, Reserve and Guard components
into and across any and all mission
functions;
Whether, and if so how, to reorganize
the Air Force Active, Reserve and
National Guard into less than 3
components;
Can the Air Force move to a periodic
readiness schedule without creating a
‘‘hollow force;’’
Does component ‘‘ownership’’ of
aircraft matter anymore and how can the
Associate Unit paradigm be adapted to
the future;
Approaching future force integration
of new systems capabilities by means of
a Concurrent Proportional resourcing
method across the components to
replace today’s priority of equipping the
Active Component first;
Accelerating the adoption of a
‘‘Continuum of Service’’ model to
facilitate the ability of Airmen to move
from any component into another at
multiple points in their career path
without prejudice;
Enhancing the total force through
equalized opportunities across the
components for professional and
technical education and shared
experiences.
Recognizing in promotion and
selection processes differing but
equivalent ends, ways, and means of
professional development.
Fundamental shift in policy goals for
‘‘Deploy-to-Dwell,’’ ‘‘Mobilization-toDwell,’’ and associated metrics for the
post-Afghanistan period, as well as how
deployment credit will be accounted.
Reconsider the nation’s needs for
Overseas Basing and the capacity of
continental United States’ infrastructure
afforded by investments in Reserve and
Guard basing capacities available to the
Total Force.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Meeting Accessibility: In accordance
with section 10(d) of the FACA, 5 U.S.C.
552b, and 41 CFR 1102–3.155, the DoD
has determined that the meeting
scheduled for November 12, 2013 was
closed to the public in its entirety.
Specifically, the Director of
Administration and Management, with
the coordination of the DoD FACA
Attorney, has determined in writing that
this meeting was closed to the public
because it discussed classified
information and matters covered by 5
U.S.C. 552b(c)(1).
Written Comments: Pursuant to 41
CFR 102–3.105(j) and 102–3.140 and
section 10(a)(3) of the FACA, the public
or interested organizations may submit
written comments to the Commission in
response to the stated agenda of the
open and/or closed meeting or the
Commission’s mission. The Designated
Federal Officer (DFO) will review all
submitted written statements before
forwarding to the Commission. Written
comments should be submitted to Mrs.
Marcia Moore, DFO, via facsimile or
electronic mail, the preferred modes of
submission. Each page of the comment
must include the author’s name, title or
affiliation, address, and daytime phone
number. All contact information may be
found in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section. While written
comments are forwarded to the
Commissioners upon receipt, note that
all written comments on the
Commission’s charge, as described in
the ‘Background’ section, must be
received by November 29, 2013, via
email or fax, to be considered by the
Commissioners for the final report. The
postmark date was November 8, 2013.
Due to difficulties finalizing the
meeting agenda for the scheduled
meeting of the National Commission on
the Structure of the Air Force for
November 12, 2013, the requirements of
41 CFR 102–3.150(a) were not met.
Accordingly, the Advisory Committee
Management Officer for the Department
of Defense, pursuant to 41 CFR 102–
3.150(b), waived the 15-calendar day
notification requirement.
Background
The National Commission on the
Structure of the Air Force was
established by the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013
(Pub. L. 112–239). The Department of
Defense sponsor for the Commission is
the Director of Administration and
Management, Mr. Michael L. Rhodes.
The Commission is tasked to submit a
report, containing a comprehensive
study and recommendations, by
February 1, 2014 to the President of the
United States and the Congressional
E:\FR\FM\14NON1.SGM
14NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2013 / Notices
defense committees. The report will
contain a detailed statement of the
findings and conclusions of the
Commission, together with its
recommendations for such legislation
and administrative actions it may
consider appropriate in light of the
results of the study. The comprehensive
study of the structure of the U.S. Air
Force will determine whether, and how,
the structure should be modified to best
fulfill current and anticipated mission
requirements for the U.S. Air Force in
a manner consistent with available
resources.
The evaluation factors under
consideration by the Commission are for
a U.S. Air Force structure that—(a)
meets current and anticipated
requirements of the combatant
commands; (b) achieves an appropriate
balance between the regular and reserve
components of the Air Force, taking
advantage of the unique strengths and
capabilities of each; (c) ensures that the
regular and reserve components of the
Air Force have the capacity needed to
support current and anticipated
homeland defense and disaster
assistance missions in the United States;
(d) provides for sufficient numbers of
regular members of the Air Force to
provide a base of trained personnel from
which the personnel of the reserve
components of the Air Force could be
recruited; (e) maintains a peacetime
rotation force to support operational
tempo goals of 1:2 for regular members
of the Air Forces and 1:5 for members
of the reserve components of the Air
Force; and (f) maximizes and
appropriately balances affordability,
efficiency, effectiveness, capability, and
readiness.
Dated: November 8, 2013.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2013–27270 Filed 11–13–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
TKELleY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
[Docket No.: ED–2013–ICCD–0113]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Submission to the Office of
Management and Budget for Review
and Approval; Comment Request;
Student Assistance General
Provisions—Satisfactory Academic
Progress Policy
Federal Student Aid (FSA),
Department of Education (ED).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:20 Nov 13, 2013
Jkt 232001
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. chapter 3501 et seq.), ED is
proposing an extension of an existing
information collection.
DATES: Interested persons are invited to
submit comments on or before
December 16, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Comments submitted in
response to this notice should be
submitted electronically through the
Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov by selecting
Docket ID number ED–2013–ICCD–0113
or via postal mail, commercial delivery,
or hand delivery. Please note that
comments submitted by fax or email
and those submitted after the comment
period will not be accepted. Written
requests for information or comments
submitted by postal mail or delivery
should be addressed to the Director of
the Information Collection Clearance
Division, U.S. Department of Education,
400 Maryland Avenue SW., LBJ, Room
2E103,Washington, DC 20202–4537.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
questions related to collection activities
or burden, please call Kate Mullan, 202–
401–0563 or electronically mail
ICDocketMgr@ed.gov. Please do not
send comments here.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Department of Education (ED), in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general
public and Federal agencies with an
opportunity to comment on proposed,
revised, and continuing collections of
information. This helps the Department
assess the impact of its information
collection requirements and minimize
the public’s reporting burden. It also
helps the public understand the
Department’s information collection
requirements and provide the requested
data in the desired format. ED is
soliciting comments on the proposed
information collection request (ICR) that
is described below. The Department of
Education is especially interested in
public comment addressing the
following issues: (1) Is this collection
necessary to the proper functions of the
Department; (2) will this information be
processed and used in a timely manner;
(3) is the estimate of burden accurate;
(4) how might the Department enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (5) how
might the Department minimize the
burden of this collection on the
respondents, including through the use
of information technology. Please note
that written comments received in
response to this notice will be
considered public records.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
68427
Title of Collection: Student Assistance
General Provisions—Subpart K—
Verification Student Aid Application
Information.
OMB Control Number: 1845–0108.
Type of Review: Extension without
change of an existing collection of
information.
Respondents/Affected Public: Private
sector, State, Local, or Tribal
Governments, individuals or
households.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Responses: 37,160,441.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Burden Hours: 1,627,616.
Abstract: This request is for an
extension of the current approval of the
policies and procedures for determining
satisfactory academic progress (SAP) as
required in Section 484 of the Higher
Education Act of 1965, as amended
(HEA). These regulations identify the
policies and procedures to ensure that
students are making satisfactory
academic progress in their program at a
pace and a level to receive or continue
to receive Title IV, HEA program funds.
If there is lapse in progress, the policy
must identify how the student will be
notified and what steps are available to
a student not making satisfactory
academic progress toward the
completion of their program, and under
what conditions a student who is not
making satisfactory academic progress
may continue to receive Title IV, HEA
program funds.
Dated: November 8, 2013.
Kate Mullan,
Acting Director, Information Collection
Clearance Division, Privacy, Information and
Records Management Services, Office of
Management.
[FR Doc. 2013–27267 Filed 11–13–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
[Docket No.: ED–2013–ICCD–0118]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Submission to the Office of
Management and Budget for Review
and Approval; Comment Request;
Application for Approval To Participate
in Federal Student Financial Aid
Programs
Federal Student Aid (FSA),
Department of Education (ED).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. chapter 3501 et seq.), ED is
proposing an extension of an existing
information collection.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\14NON1.SGM
14NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 220 (Thursday, November 14, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68425-68427]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-27270]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
Meeting of the National Commission on the Structure of the Air
Force
AGENCY: Director of Administration and Management, DoD.
ACTION: Notice of Advisory Committee Meeting.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing this notice to
announce that the following Federal advisory committee closed meeting
of the National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force (``the
Commission'') has taken place. Due to difficulties finalizing the
meeting agenda for the scheduled meeting of the National Commission on
the Structure of the Air Force for November 12, 2013, this meeting
notice is publishing in the Federal Register after the date of the
meeting.
DATES: Dates of Closed Meeting, including Hearing and Commission
Discussion: Tuesday, November 12, 2013, from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
ADDRESSES: 2521 South Clark Street, Suite 525, Crystal City, VA 22202
and a secure video teleconferencing line.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mrs. Marcia Moore, Designated Federal Officer, National Commission
on the Structure of the Air Force, 1950 Defense Pentagon, Room 3A874,
Washington, DC 20301-1950. Email: marcia.l.moore12.civ@mail.mil. Desk
(703) 545-9113. Facsimile (703) 692-5625.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of Meeting: This meeting was held
under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) of
1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine
Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.150. This
meeting was the second in a series of three meetings held for the
Commissioners to consider information and data from a variety of
sources that will be presented and aggregated by employing several
data, analytic and decision support tools that contain classified
information.
Agenda: The agenda items were:
--The role of airpower in the post-Afghanistan national security
situations likely to be encountered by the Air Force capabilities and
Airmen and the implications for the structure of the Air Force. This
discussion will be organized into three categories. The ``Away Game,''
will involve emerging demands on Air Force capabilities such as:
Intelligence,
[[Page 68426]]
Surveillance and reconnaissance, Remotely Piloted Aircraft, Space,
Cyber, Special Operations, and Building Partnership Capacity.
Commissioners will also explore the implications of rising demands and
expectations for the ``Home Game'' in missions such as Homeland
Defense, Homeland Security, and Defense Support to Civil Agencies. This
will include implications for the structure of the Air Force from the
growing threat of the ``Away Game'' involving simultaneous attacks on
the Homeland. The third area of discussion will be on the continuing
growth of demand on traditional Air Force core functions including: Air
Superiority, Air Mobility, Global Precision Attack, Nuclear Deterrence
Operations, Command and Control, Personnel Recovery, Agile Combat
Support, Training and Education, and other specific mission sets such
as security forces, civil engineering and science and technology.
-- Projections and assumptions about future resource levels that will
be available to organize, train and equip the Air Force. This will
include assumptions about how the Budget Control Act and Sequestration
legislation will affect Total Obligational Authority and associated
planning, programming and budgeting flexibility. Commissioners will
also consider the impact of strategic choices on Air Force capabilities
and force structure options derived from the selection of national
priorities among modernization, technology, recapitalization,
readiness, capacity and force structure. In this discussion
Commissioners will consider the various approaches to how to calculate
and apply cost methods and data to questions of force structure.
--The root causes of legislative and bureaucratic development of the
force structure issues that led to the creation of the Commission in
2013. They will consider how these issues are rooted in the American
militia heritage and the history of the Air Force since 1947. This
discussion will extend to accounting for the socio-cultural dimensions
of force structure issues ranging from the fundamental relationship of
the American people to their military and to sub-cultures within the
Air Force.
--How to institutionalize the shift in the fundamental role of the
reserve components from a strategic reserve to an operational reserve
with associated expectations. Commissioners will also consider the
force mix options they are prepared to assess in terms of relative
weight of force structure in each of the components. Commissioners will
consider whether to recommend that the Department of Defense invert the
force sizing planning paradigm from sizing to meet the expected wartime
surge to an approach that begins with the Steady State Requirement then
resource the components to provide the nation with a meaningful surge
capacity for the strategy. They will also address considerations for
measuring and assessing Active, Reserve and Guard Effectiveness--both
cost and mission effectiveness.
--Alternative approaches to how the nation should direct, control and
guide the active, reserve and National Guard Air Forces, including:
Whether, and if so how, to simplify Title 10, Title 32 and other
governing legislative authorities;
How to re-balance the current mix of Active, Reserve and Guard
components into and across any and all mission functions;
Whether, and if so how, to reorganize the Air Force Active, Reserve
and National Guard into less than 3 components;
Can the Air Force move to a periodic readiness schedule without
creating a ``hollow force;''
Does component ``ownership'' of aircraft matter anymore and how can
the Associate Unit paradigm be adapted to the future;
Approaching future force integration of new systems capabilities by
means of a Concurrent Proportional resourcing method across the
components to replace today's priority of equipping the Active
Component first;
Accelerating the adoption of a ``Continuum of Service'' model to
facilitate the ability of Airmen to move from any component into
another at multiple points in their career path without prejudice;
Enhancing the total force through equalized opportunities across
the components for professional and technical education and shared
experiences.
Recognizing in promotion and selection processes differing but
equivalent ends, ways, and means of professional development.
Fundamental shift in policy goals for ``Deploy-to-Dwell,''
``Mobilization-to-Dwell,'' and associated metrics for the post-
Afghanistan period, as well as how deployment credit will be accounted.
Reconsider the nation's needs for Overseas Basing and the capacity
of continental United States' infrastructure afforded by investments in
Reserve and Guard basing capacities available to the Total Force.
Meeting Accessibility: In accordance with section 10(d) of the
FACA, 5 U.S.C. 552b, and 41 CFR 1102-3.155, the DoD has determined that
the meeting scheduled for November 12, 2013 was closed to the public in
its entirety. Specifically, the Director of Administration and
Management, with the coordination of the DoD FACA Attorney, has
determined in writing that this meeting was closed to the public
because it discussed classified information and matters covered by 5
U.S.C. 552b(c)(1).
Written Comments: Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.105(j) and 102-3.140 and
section 10(a)(3) of the FACA, the public or interested organizations
may submit written comments to the Commission in response to the stated
agenda of the open and/or closed meeting or the Commission's mission.
The Designated Federal Officer (DFO) will review all submitted written
statements before forwarding to the Commission. Written comments should
be submitted to Mrs. Marcia Moore, DFO, via facsimile or electronic
mail, the preferred modes of submission. Each page of the comment must
include the author's name, title or affiliation, address, and daytime
phone number. All contact information may be found in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. While written comments are forwarded to
the Commissioners upon receipt, note that all written comments on the
Commission's charge, as described in the `Background' section, must be
received by November 29, 2013, via email or fax, to be considered by
the Commissioners for the final report. The postmark date was November
8, 2013.
Due to difficulties finalizing the meeting agenda for the scheduled
meeting of the National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force
for November 12, 2013, the requirements of 41 CFR 102-3.150(a) were not
met. Accordingly, the Advisory Committee Management Officer for the
Department of Defense, pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.150(b), waived the 15-
calendar day notification requirement.
Background
The National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force was
established by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2013 (Pub. L. 112-239). The Department of Defense sponsor for the
Commission is the Director of Administration and Management, Mr.
Michael L. Rhodes. The Commission is tasked to submit a report,
containing a comprehensive study and recommendations, by February 1,
2014 to the President of the United States and the Congressional
[[Page 68427]]
defense committees. The report will contain a detailed statement of the
findings and conclusions of the Commission, together with its
recommendations for such legislation and administrative actions it may
consider appropriate in light of the results of the study. The
comprehensive study of the structure of the U.S. Air Force will
determine whether, and how, the structure should be modified to best
fulfill current and anticipated mission requirements for the U.S. Air
Force in a manner consistent with available resources.
The evaluation factors under consideration by the Commission are
for a U.S. Air Force structure that--(a) meets current and anticipated
requirements of the combatant commands; (b) achieves an appropriate
balance between the regular and reserve components of the Air Force,
taking advantage of the unique strengths and capabilities of each; (c)
ensures that the regular and reserve components of the Air Force have
the capacity needed to support current and anticipated homeland defense
and disaster assistance missions in the United States; (d) provides for
sufficient numbers of regular members of the Air Force to provide a
base of trained personnel from which the personnel of the reserve
components of the Air Force could be recruited; (e) maintains a
peacetime rotation force to support operational tempo goals of 1:2 for
regular members of the Air Forces and 1:5 for members of the reserve
components of the Air Force; and (f) maximizes and appropriately
balances affordability, efficiency, effectiveness, capability, and
readiness.
Dated: November 8, 2013.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2013-27270 Filed 11-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P