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
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.