GIS/Data Implementation Strategic PlanThe Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE) has...

RAF Mildenhall

Mildenhall, England

August 1999

GIS/Data Implementation

Strategic Plan

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

The Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE) has

created this GIS/Data Implementation Strategic Plan for the 100th Air

Refueling Wing, RAF Mildenhall, England, under United States Air

Forces in Europe (USAFE) command. The resulting document�

produced in accordance with Air Force planning guidelines�

summarizes the background information and recommendations that

were developed for this plan.

Currently, the USAFE personnel at RAF Mildenhall have a great

wealth of information that is potentially available to all of them.

However, due to the constraints of multiple stand-alone

systems, the variety of data formats used, and the

limited accessibility to data, this wealth of information

does not provide its full value to the base personnel.

What would it take to organize all of this information

into a centralized system, and how would RAF Mildenhall staff be

able to access it more conveniently?

The GIS/Data Implementation Strategic Plan document was created

to answer these questions...and many more. It begins with the

essentials in Sections 1 and 2: the history and mission of RAF

Mildenhall, the nature and purpose of the GIS project and the

Strategic Plan, the relationship of the Strategic Plan to the Base

Comprehensive Plan, and the existing conditions and needs of RAF

Mildenhall.

Next, the Strategic Plan illustrates the four phases of implementing a

GIS for RAF Mildenhall in Sections 3-6:

1. Defining the mission, administration, and schedules for

implementing the data and GIS network;

2. Collecting and verifying�or building� the data;

3. Creating a network and its operation parameters for conveying

the data;

4. Developing the tools, interface, and training required for

accessing the data.

Finally, the plan concludes with two bookends to the rest of the

Strategic Plan and its background information. Section 7 looks

ahead at how the Strategic Plan can be maintained and revised, and

Sections 8 and 9 look back at who contributed to the plan and the

interview notes that were used to develop it. Additionally, GIS

prototype and cost-benefit information is included at the end of the

report.

The GIS/Data ImplementationStrategic Plan for

RAF Mildenhall, England

Could a GIS help everyone at RAFMildenhall accomplish their missionsbetter, faster, and cheaper?

iAIR FORCE CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL EXCELLENCE

GIS/Data Implementation Strategic PlanR

AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Table of Contents

Background of RAF Mildenhall ....................................................... 1-1

Purpose of Project ........................................................................... 1-2

Purpose of Document ...................................................................... 1-5

Audience ......................................................................................... 1-7

Plan Organization ........................................................................... 1-7

Relationship to Base Comprehensive Plan ..................................... 1-8

Plan Findings .................................................................................. 2-1

Current Conditions Update (Summer 1999) ............................ 2-2

Available Geographic Information .......................................... 2-2

Framework Data ....................................................................... 2-7

Overlay Data ............................................................................ 2-7

Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment of

Geographically Related Information ....................................... 2-8

Overview ........................................................................................ 3-1

Recommendations ................................................................... 3-1

Adopt a Mission Statement ...................................................... 3-1

Establish a GIS Steering Committee ......................................... 3-2

Establish a GIS Technical Committee ...................................... 3-2

Appoint a Basewide GIS Manager ............................................ 3-3

Establish a Computer Resources Board .................................... 3-5

Build GIS Staff Qualifications ................................................... 3-5

Implementation and Training Schedule .......................................... 3-6

Summary ......................................................................................... 3-6

Overview ........................................................................................ 4-1

Recommendations .......................................................................... 4-1

Build the Base Layout Mapping ................................................ 4-1

Build the Floor Plans ................................................................ 4-2

Build the Utility Infrastructure Mapping ................................. 4-3

Build the Real Property Data .................................................... 4-4

Staff Resources and Work Order Development ............................... 4-5

Budget Estimates .............................................................................. 4-5

Justification and Impact Statement ................................................. 4-7


Summary ......................................................................................... 4-7

Section 1: Introduction

Section 2: ExistingConditions and NeedsAssessment

Section 3: Phase 1Component Plan�Settingthe Stage

Section 4: Phase 2Component Plan�Buildingthe Hub of the Wheel

ii TABLE OF CONTENTS

RA

F M

ilden

hal

l, E

ng

lan

d

Section 5: Phase 3Component Plan�Buildingthe Spokes of the Wheel

Overview ........................................................................................ 5-1


Confirm Network Connections ............................................... 5-1

Establish Computer Automation Resources ............................. 5-2

Establish Information Sharing Practices .................................. 5-3

Staff Resources and Work Order Development ............................... 5-4

Budget Estimate ............................................................................... 5-4



Summary ......................................................................................... 5-5

Overview ........................................................................................ 6-1


Implement a Web-Based GIS Viewing and Analysis Tool ......... 6-1

Develop a Custom User Interface ............................................. 6-2

Implement Redlining ............................................................... 6-3

Plan for Future GIS Application Development ......................... 6-6

Train Potential Users ................................................................ 6-6

Budget Estimate ............................................................................... 6-7



Summary ......................................................................................... 6-8

Overview ........................................................................................ 7-1

Maintenance of the Strategic Plan .................................................. 7-1

RAF Mildenhall Sources .................................................................. 8-1

Additional Sources .......................................................................... 8-3

Command Post (100 ARW/CP) ....................................................... 9-1

Pertinent Responsibilities ........................................................ 9-1

Technology and Data: Today .................................................... 9-1

Technology and Data: Future .................................................... 9-1

Wing Plans (100 ARW/XP) ............................................................. 9-2




Wing Safety (100 ARW/SE) ............................................................. 9-3




Section 6: Phase 4Component Plan�Buildingthe Rim of the Wheel

Section 7: Plan Maintenanceand Revision

Section 8:Acknowledgments

Section 9: Interview Notes

iiiAIR FORCE CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL EXCELLENCE


AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Fuels Supply (100 LGS) .................................................................... 9-5




Flight Operations (100 OG) ............................................................. 9-7




CE Readiness (100 CES) ................................................................... 9-9


Technology and Data: Today .................................................. 9-10

Technology and Data: Future .................................................. 9-10

CE Real Property (100 CES) ........................................................... 9-11

Pertinent Responsibilities ...................................................... 9-11



CE Project Managers (100 CES) ..................................................... 9-13




CE Building Management Systems (100 CES) ............................... 9-15




CE Maintenance Engineering/CADD Shop (100 CES) .................. 9-18




CE Associate Civil Engineer for Ministry of Defense (MOD) ....... 9-22




CE Computer Services Shop (100 CES) .......................................... 9-24




CE Customer Service (100 CES) .................................................... 9-25



CE Environmental Flight (100 CES) .............................................. 9-26




CE Fire and Rescue (100 CES) ........................................................ 9-29



Section 9: Interview Notes(continued)

iv TABLE OF CONTENTS

RA

F M

ilden

hal

l, E

ng

lan

d


Communications Squadron (Comm) (100 CS) .............................. 9-30




LAN Shop (100 CS) ........................................................................ 9-32



Security Forces (100 SFS) ............................................................... 9-33




Lodging Maintenance (LM) (100 SVS) .......................................... 9-35




C2IPS Operations (627 AMSS) ....................................................... 9-36




GIS Prototype ................................................................................ 10-1

Abbreviations and Acronyms ....................................................... 11-1

A Cost-Benefit Scenario ................................................................. 12-1

A Model Approach to Estimating GIS Benefits, by Stephen R.

Gillespie ........................................................................................ 12-2

Abstract .................................................................................. 12-2

Paper ...................................................................................... 12-2

General Framework for GIS Benefits ..................................... 12-3

Factors Influencing Level of GIS Benefits ............................... 12-4

A Model to Estimate Benefits .................................................. 12-6

How to Use the Model ........................................................... 12-8

Conclusion ............................................................................ 12-9

References ............................................................................ 12-10

Section 10: GIS Prototype

Section 11: Abbreviationsand Acronyms

Section 12: GIS Cost-BenefitAnalysis Paradigm

Section 9: Interview Notes(continued)

vAIR FORCE CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL EXCELLENCE


AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Figure 1�Map of Mildenhall, England Region ............................... 1-1

Figure 2�KC135 Stratotanker Refueling a Belgian F-16 .................. 1-1

Figure 3�Officers Club and Visiting Officers Headquarters .......... 1-2

Figure 4�100th ARW Headquarters ............................................... 1-2

Figure 5�Building 560 ................................................................... 1-2

Figure 6�Security at RAF Mildenhall ............................................. 1-3

Figure 7�Flight Operations at RAF Mildenhall .............................. 1-3

Figure 8�GIS Framework ............................................................... 1-5

Figure 9�GIS Wheel ....................................................................... 1-6

Figure 10�Framework Data Includes the Base Map ........................ 2-7

Figure 11�Overlay Data Includes Specific Information ................. 2-7

Figure 12�Command Post and Base Map Data ............................... 2-8

Figure 13�Flight Operations and Geographic Data ........................ 2-9

Figure 14�ALOHA: An Example of Software-GIS Integration ...... 2-10

Figure 15�Sample GIS Mission Statement ..................................... 3-1

Figure 16�Data Management and Networking Software ............... 3-3

Figure 17�Sample GIS Manager Position Description ................... 3-4

Figure 18�Sample GIS Analyst/Programmer Decription ................ 3-5

Figure 19�Sample GIS Technician Description .............................. 3-6

Figure 20�Recommended Web Redlining Process ........................ 6-4

Figure 21�Four Tiers of GIS Users at RAF Mildenhall .................... 6-5

Figure 22�RAF Mildenhall GIS Prototype ................................... 10-1

Figure 23�Base Map Screen ......................................................... 10-2

Figure 24�Web Map Showing Building Names & Locations ....... 10-3

Figure 25�Database Information via Web Map ........................... 10-4

Figure 26�A Floor Plan of Building 443 is Accessed .................... 10-5

Figure 27�A Removed Wall is Noted with Redline Function ...... 10-6

Figure 28�Redline Maintenance Manager .................................. 10-7

Table 1�Summary of Existing Technology Resources .................... 2-1

Table 2�Summary of Existing Data Sources and Users ................... 2-3

Table 3�Recommended Hardware Configurations ........................ 5-2

Table 4�GeoMedia Web Map Purchases ........................................ 6-7

Table 5�RAF Mildenhall Interview Schedule and Participants ..... 8-1

Table 6�RAF Mildenhall Briefing Participants ............................... 8-2

List of Figures

List of Tables

1-1AIR FORCE CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL EXCELLENCE


AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Figure 2�A Belgian AirForce F-16 Fighting Falconpulls up behind a U.S. AirForce Boeing KC-135Stratotanker during mid-air fueling in the skiesover Spain. The KC-135sare part of the 100th AirRefueling Wing based atRAF Mildenhall, England.

Section 1: Introduction

Background of RAF Mildenhall

Opened as

Royal Air Force

Station

Mildenhall on

16 October

1934, the

current home

of the U.S. Air

Force (USAF)

3rd Air Force

has a history as

broad and

colorful as the

agricultural

fields that make up this region of England. When it

opened, it was one of the largest bases in the British

Bomber Command. And during World War II, its

active airfield launched more than 8,000 sorties

striving to reach the German front.

Today, RAF Mildenhall is home to the 100th Air

Refueling Wing (ARW), the 352nd Special

Operations Group (SOG), as well as HQ 3rd Air Force.

Boeing B-17s and Avro Lancasters were replaced in

the late 1940s with Douglas C-47 and C-54

transports, as they flew humanitarian aid during the

Berlin Airlift. The Boeing KC-135 Stratotankers

currently based at the field fly refueling missions in

support of the NATO No-Fly Zone over war-torn

Bosnia on the European continent. Almost 65 years

after its high-profile opening, RAF Mildenhall enjoys

a rich past and a strong future of USAF activity.

Located about 70 miles northeast of London, today�s

RAF Mildenhall is a very different place than when it

opened in 1934. Piston-engine aircraft gave way to

today�s modern jets, and the needs of aircraft

support, airfield maintenance, and general quality of

life change with each advance in technology. To

fulfill the 100th ARW�s Mission Statement of

�Conducting air refueling, force protection, force

deployment and support operations for U.S. and

NATO anytime, anywhere,� RAF Mildenhall-assigned

military and civilian personnel find daily challenges

in making sure this mission is met.

RAF Mildenhall has not only a historic importance to

the world, but it also stands to support the peacetime

vision of the future. The buildings and airfields at

RAF Mildenhall have a rich history and purposeful

mission, and if they could only talk, they would fill the

listener with genuine respect.

Figure 1�Mildenhall,England and itssurrounding region.

1-2 SECTION 1

IntroductionR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

Buildings such as the OfficersClub and Visiting OfficersQuarters (Figure 3, top), the100th ARW Headquarters(Figure 4, above), andBuilding 560 (Figure 5, left)�one of the oldest at RAFMildenhall�each have theirown stories to tell. Becauseof their varying ages,characteristics, and needs, aGIS can be valuable forhelping a wide variety ofpeople make informeddecisions.

Purpose of Project

If they could only talk�

How many times has someone wished a building

could talk? If only that building could tell you what

it has seen since the day a mason put the first stone

in place. What would it say?

Would it tell about the day in 1934 that King George

V sat in a chair in the Main Hall? Would a runway

tell about the bullet-riddled bomber limping to a

landing with one engine on fire?

Or would that same building explain that its roof is

leaking over the seam where the recent addition was

joined to the old structure? Would that same runway

tell about how storm water is undercutting a joint in

its pavement?

While it�s not quite that simple, there is a way in

which a building can �talk� to us. And this applies

not only to buildings, but also to vehicle ways,

airfield pavements, and even fire hydrants�all have

a way to �tell� about themselves.

Using modern computer technology to maintain

base layout maps, engineering drawings, or facility

floor plans, information about a feature on a drawing

or a map can give the user more knowledge than

simply its shape. An aircraft hardstand can �tell� the

Wing Planner what weight it will bear for a specific

parking configuration. A water valve can �tell� the

maintenance engineer its type, flow capacity, or

installation date. A fire alarm can �tell� the

firefighter exactly where it�s located in a building, as

well as the fact that the adjoining room contains

hazardous materials.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

With the development of geographic information

system (GIS) technology, information that is now

maintained by several different organizations in

paper format or separate databases can be linked to

electronic drawing files and base maps to give the

user more than just lines on a page. GIS

technology�the marrying together of drawings

with related information about features on that

drawing�helps the user to find in-depth

information without searching multiple sources.

By linking tabular data�such as load-bearing

capacity or the tail number of the aircraft that�s

currently parked in a certain space�a user has not

only graphic information but also the related

information usually found only by searching many

related documents or databases. The development of

GIS capabilities at RAF Mildenhall could eventually

give every user on the base an opportunity to share

and benefit from information that is maintained by

others.

The RAF Mildenhall GIS/Data Implementation Strategic

Plan represents the first step in a multitask effort that

will eventually result in an integrated information

system (IS). The goal for this strategic plan is to

define GIS capabilities to integrate the existing 100th

ARW IS assets into a comprehensive, standardized

system.

Integrated access to spatially related information will

one day allow multiple users to access, maintain, and

distribute data associated with the following:

✈ Planning

✈ Design and facility management

✈ Natural and cultural resources

✈ Airfield operations

✈ Emergency management and response

✈ Environmental management concerns

RAF Mildenhall can expect to gain many important

benefits from developing this system, including

these examples:

✈ Provide timely, accurate data

✈ Eliminate duplication of effort in data access and

management

✈ Promote better use of available�sometimes

critical�information

To accomplish this strategic plan, MSgt Mark Clinger

and Nigel Hutchinson conducted initial visits within

the 100th ARW. These visits were designed to

introduce many of the staff members in the

organization to simple GIS concepts. As

understanding of GIS began to develop, users were

prepared for the project interviews that followed in

mid-June 1998.

Timely and accurate data is essential for everything at RAF Mildenhall�from security (Figure 6, left) to flight operations(Figure 7, right). An integrated information system can unite the existing assets of the 100th ARW into a comprehensive,standardized system.

1-4 SECTION 1

IntroductionR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

The first step in developing the plan is to determine

the current condition of spatially related

information in the 100th ARW, which comprises the

following:

✈ 100th CES (Customer Service, Maintenance

Engineering, Base Development, Real Property,

Environmental, Readiness, Fire Department,

Infrastructure, and Defense Estate Organization)

✈ Security Forces

✈ Communications Squadron

✈ Wing Safety

✈ Wing Plans and Services

✈ Base Operations

✈ Wing Command Post

✈ 100th Services Squadron

This review included learning the type, quality, age,

and condition of the spatial information in use. The

goals were as follows:

✈ To define, assess, and prioritize the steps to be

taken to bring all organizations to an equal level

of information management

✈ To establish a common definition of GIS

capabilities to be developed at RAF Mildenhall

✈ To chart a course toward a full GIS

implementation strategy within each related

organization at RAF Mildenhall



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Purpose of Document

The RAF Mildenhall

GIS/Data

Implementation

Strategic Plan considers

the computer-aided

design and drafting

(CADD) GIS

implementation

planning process from AFCEE and the results of the

USAF Survey Assessment Report (CADD/GIS) from

AFCESA. The plan is developed to be consistent with

the guidelines of the most current version of the Tri-

Service CADD/GIS Technology Center initiatives for

GIS development and the Air Force Civil Engineer

Automation Vision (May 1996) from the Air Force

Civil Engineer Support Activity (AFCESA). The plan

also considers the AFCESA development of the

Automation Civil Engineer System (ACES) program

in any direction presented to RAF Mildenhall.

The purpose of the plan is to bring currently

disconnected users together to share information.

The goal is not to change who is responsible for data,

but instead to allow more people to use the

information more effectively.

The recommendations sections of this plan propose

two analogies for GIS development at RAFM.

The first analogy�for the development of the data�

is built on a frame:

✈ First, an effective and up-to-date base map

should be developed to serve as the framework

data for other data development.

✈ Next, organization- or even process-specific data

should be developed among the GIS users. This

overlay data will, in effect, be superimposed on

the framework data.

Figure 8�A GIS can function like a picture frame (left). Itis built on a base map�the foundation of further datadevelopment (below)�and can eventually also includeprocess-specific overlay data (bottom) that can besuperimposed on the base map.

PurposeTo bring currentlydisconnected userstogether to shareinformation.

1-6 SECTION 1

IntroductionR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

The other analogy�for the development of the

basewide GIS itself�is built on a wheel:

✈ First, the base will set the stage for the GIS wheel

by building and strengthening the GIS

organization within RAFM.

✈ Then comes building the hub of the wheel,

which concerns developing integration

pathways and standards.

✈ Next is developing the spokes of the wheel,

which pertain to developing GIS capabilities.

✈ Finally, the base will develop the rim of the

wheel, which relates to the concept of multiple

GIS users in two-way communication.

The result of this process will be the completed GIS

development, blending a GIS organization,

integration, standards, capabilities, and data sharing,

represented by the unified GIS wheel.

The three components work together as an integratedsystem.

Figure 9�A GIS can also function like a wheel that offersan integrated network of information while providingmultiple users simultaneous access to data.

The hub concerns developingintegration pathways andstandards.

The spokes pertain todeveloping GIS capabilities.

The rim relates to the concept ofmultiple GIS users in two-waycommunication.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Audience

As this report has evolved the audience has changed.

Generally it includes a wide group of people

responsible for data maintenance and management,

as well as users who have a stake in data sharing.

For the 35% submittal, which was a compilation of

the interview notes as collected in the initial site

visit from 9 to 17 June 1998, all staff interviewed and

other interested parties reviewed and commented on

the notes. Information obtained in these interviews

and the returned comments serve as the basis for all

recommendations in the plan.

For the 65% submittal and forward, the audience is

concentrated on those responsible for information

development, planning, budgeting, and quality.

Plan Organization

The GIS/Data Implementation Strategic Plan consists

of the following components:

✈ GIS Plan for RAF Mildenhall

✯ Section 1: Introduction to RAF Mildenhall

in relation to developing GIS capabilities

✈ Plan Findings

✯ Section 2: Existing conditions and needs

assessment, concerning potential basewide-

related GIS applications, hardware/software/

networking, personnel and training, and

data requirements

✈ Recommendations

✯ Section 3 is the Phase 1 component plan,

which includes recommendations and a

discussion of an implementation timeframe.

This section describes setting the stage for

the basewide GIS.


which includes recommendations,

discussion of budget considerations, a

justification and impact statement, and


This section tells about developing the hub

of the GIS wheel.






This section makes recommendations for

creating the spokes of the GIS wheel.






This section pertains to building the rim of

the GIS wheel.

✯ Section 7 describes plan maintenance and

revision.

✯ Section 8 acknowledges all the assistance

provided by RAFM personnel, AFCEE staff,

and other sources.

✯ Section 9 contains the interview notes.

✯ Section 10 gives a brief overview of the GIS

prototype.

✯ Section 11 is a list of abbreviations and

acronyms used throughout this plan.

✯ Section 12 contains an unpublished paper

written by Stephen R. Gillespie of the U.S.

Geological Survey (USGS). This paper

provides a paradigm for evaluating the cost

benefits of GIS deployment.

Consideration is given to the suitability of data or

applications for implementation in the plan, which

involves the following criteria:

✈ Apply facility, infrastructure, and similar

geographically related information.

✈ Reference industry-accepted research into

benefits and costs as they relate to automating

information access and applications on the base.

1-8 SECTION 1

IntroductionR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

✈ Create useful links between electronic and paper

data (maps and tabular files).

✈ Use data that is tracked or accessed by more than

one organization or office.

✈ Use data that is of benefit to multiple

organizations.

Relationship to Base ComprehensivePlan

Just as the Facility Utilization Survey (FUS) is an

outgrowth of the RAF Mildenhall Base

Comprehensive Plan (BCP), the GIS/Data

Implementation Strategic Plan is meant to provide

background information for future development. As

the BCP serves as the model for future installation

development, this plan should also be used as a

guide.

To follow an Air Force standard, this document is

generally modeled on the General Plan template, as

defined in USAF Comprehensive Planning. Although

not as concerned with the physical setting or

development of the installation, this plan focuses on

developing and sharing strong operations-,

engineering-, and planning-related data.

According to the General Plan Guide and Template,

Section B, Planning Process, page 17:

Planning is a process that promotes informed,

sound, and coordinated decisions on future

installation development. The planning process

consists of five major steps:

Identification of mission, goals, existing

conditions, and requirements;

Evaluation of opportunities, constraints, and

alternative solutions

Implementation of the preferred alternative;

Maintenance of the plan; and

Feedback.

This GIS/Data Implementation Strategic Plan seeks to

provide a starting point for a long-term opportunity

for increased data sharing at RAF Mildenhall.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Section 2: Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment

Plan Findings

Between 9 and 16 June 1998, RAF Mildenhall

personnel participated in a variety of briefings and

interviews. These briefings and interviews provided

Pr int/ Inter - GIS/CADD

Organization PCs Plot E-Mai l n e t I W I M S Databases Software

LAN Shop ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✈ Oracle✈ Access �

CES Readiness ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✈ ALOHA ✈ ArcExplorer

✈ CAMEO ✈ ArcView

Computer Shop ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Communications Squadron ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✈ Access �

Real Property ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✈ Access �✈ FileFlow �

Wing Plans ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✈ CAMS✈ Base Support Plan✈ STEP

Flight Operations ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✈ Access ✈ AutoCAD

Fuels Supply ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✈ Fuels Automated �System

✈ FoxPro✈ Oracle✈ Fuels Manager

Security Forces ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✈ FoxPro �✈ Access

CE Project Managers ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✈ Access ✈ MicroStation(as part of CE)

Wing Safety ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ � �

CE Building Management ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✈ SQL*Server ✈ MicroStation✈ Access (as part of CE)✈ Oracle

Maintenance/Engineering ✓* ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✈ Access ✈ MGECADD ✈ Oracle ✈ VistaMap

✈ ArcView✈ ArcExplorer

✈ MicroStation

a good understanding of GIS-related existing

conditions and needs at RAF Mildenhall.

Table 1 summarizes the information gathered

throughout the existing conditions review:

Table 1. Summary of Existing Technology Resources

2-2 SECTION 2

Existing Conditions and Needs AssessmentR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

Pr int/ Inter - GIS/CADDOrganization PCs Plot E-Mai l n e t I W I M S Databases Software

CE Associate Civil Engineer ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✈ CMASS �✈ Abstract✈ Forward Engineering

Database

CE Customer Service ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ � �

Lodging Maintenance ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ � �

CE Environmental Flight ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✈ Access ✈ ArcView✈ Oracle

Fire and Rescue ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✈ EIS ✈ ArcView✈ ALOHA (inside EIS)✈ FSD

Command Post ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✈ Access �✈ AMC-C2IPS

* Includes Anatech Eagle 3640 large-format scanner

Table 1. Summary of Existing Technology Resources (cont.)

Available Geographic Information

Table 2 summarizes the pertinent existing data

sources that were identified during the existing

conditions review. The table shows three important

types of information for each source:

✈ The current �owner� of the data, meaning who

is typically responsible for creating and

maintaining it, marked with a «

✈ Current users of the data (other than the owner),

marked with a : for digital use or a ? for

paper use

✈ Potential users of the data, marked with a l

As noted in the table, potential users include

Bio-Environmental (Bio-E) from RAF

Lakenheath, because this organization is also

responsible for RAF Mildenhall.

As Table 2 shows, a wide range of existing data is now

being developed, maintained, and used throughout

the organizations. As you read this table, please

remember that past information storage practices as

well as the structure of organizations at RAFM has led

to the current environment. Much of the information

should be shared or even maintained in one

Continued on Page 2-6

Current Conditions UpdateSummer 1999

Hardware and Software

Based on the previous submittals of this document,

RAF Mildenhall began to purchase both hardware

and software to provide resources for implementing

the GIS plan. These include the following items,

which should be recognized as further developments

occur:

Hardware

One Pentium III Celeron 500 Server with 512 MB RAM

and 22 GB SCSI hard drive

Nine Pentium III 500 SCSI workstations for use and

viewing of GIS-related data; one located in the 100

CES/CEOM and eight in the 100 CES/CECV. This

purchase was designed to support the System

Manager (CEOM) and the users in the Environmental

Flight (CECV) in GIS.

Software

GeoMedia WebMap Version 3.0

Oracle 8 (with a potential upgrade to Oracle 8i in

FY2000.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

GraphicPaper or or Non- Owner («) Confi-Digital graphic Current Digital User ( :) Additional dence

Dataset P D G N Current Paper User (?) Potential User (·) Vintage Accuracy Level

Map C-1 Micro ✓ ✓ « ME/CADD Shop � Bio-E 1997, 1:1,000; Medium/(Base Layout Station ? Comm Squadron updated 1:2,500 for HighMapping) ? Wing Plans with 1994 1984 BCPMicroStation ? Fuels Supply aerial

? Security Forces photos,? CE Project Managers but no to? Wing Safety standard? CE Building Mgmt map? Assoc CE/MOD accuracy? CE Customer Service specs? Lodging Maintenance? CE Environmental? Fire and Rescue? Command Post? CES Readiness

Map G-Series ✓ Micro ✓ ✓ « ME/CADD Shop � CES Readiness 1986-87 1:500 High for(Utility Infra- Station ? Fuels Supply � Flight Operations (hardcopy) initialstructure) ? Security Forces � Comm Squadron mapping;MicroStation ? CE Project Managers � Bio-E medium/

? Wing Safety low for all? CE Building Mgmt new? Assoc CE/MOD features? CE Customer Service? CE Environmental? Fire and Rescue? Command Post

Floor Plans Micro ✓ ✓ « ME/CADD Shop � CES Readiness 1993 Unknown Medium(Vector) Station/ ? Comm Squadron � Bio-E (not

Oracle ? Real Property current)? Wing Plans? Security Forces? CE Project Managers? CE Building Mgmt? Assoc CE/MOD? Lodging Maintenance? CE Environmental? Fire and Rescue? Command Post

O-Plan GIS ✓ ✓ « CES Readiness � Security Forces 1998 Unknown High/Data � Fire and Rescue Medium

� Command Post

CE ✓ Word Not ✓ « CES Readiness � All onbase 1998 N/A MediumContingency at ? Wing Plans organizations andResponse Plan this approving(CRP) time

EIS Data .BMPs ✓ « Fire and Rescue � Command Post 1997 Unknown Mediumused in ? CES Readiness � Bio-E

ArcView

CE PC Visio ✓ « Computer Shop � N/A 1998 N/A HighLocations

CRIMP ✓ ✓ « Comm Squadron � ME/CADD Shop(British : LAN Shop � CE Customer ServiceTelecom) � CE PMs

� CE Base Development� Command Post

Table 2. Summary of Existing Data Sources and Users

2-4 SECTION 2


AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

Table 2. Summary of Existing Data Sources and Users (cont.)



CRIMP ✓ ✓ « Comm Squadron � ME/CADD Shop(British : LAN Shop � CE Customer ServiceTelecom) � CE PMs

� CE Base Development� Command Post

Circuit ✓ « Comm Squadron � ME/CADD Shop 1998 N/A HighDatabase � CE Customer Service

� CE PMs� CE Base Development� Command Post

Space Access ✓ « Real Property � Dep Squad 1997 N/A HighAllocation 97 ? Command Post CommandersDatabase � Facility Managers(see FUS)

Scanned File ✓ « Real Property � N/A 1998 N/A HighVoucher CDs Flow

ACES-HM Oracle ✓ ✓ « Real Property � ME/CADD Shop 1998 Unknown High(Part of ACES) � Facility Managers

� Dep SquadronCommanders

Regional Base ✓ ✓ « ME/CADD Shop · Bio-E 1997 Unknown MediumMap ? Wing Plans

? Fire and Rescue? CE Readiness

Airfield Map ✓ Auto ✓ « Flight Operations � CE PMs 1997 1"=2,500' MediumCAD ? Wing Plans � DE PMs (not

� CE Pavement current)Engineers

� Command Post

PPR Data ✓ ✓ « Flight Operations � Wing Plans 1998 N/A Unknown� Fire and Rescue� Fuels Supply

Future Micro ✓ « CE Base Development � Flight Operations 1997 1"=2,500' HighDevelopment Station : ME/CADD Shop � CES ReadinessMap (Map M) ? CE PMs � Wing Plans

Airfield Micro ✓ ✓ « CE Base Development � CES Readiness 1998 1"=2,500' HighSurfaces and Station/ : ME/CADD Shop � Wing Safety (fieldObstructions Access ? CE PMs � Flight Operations survey set(Map E) � Wing Plans for first

qtr 1999)

Automatic ATG « Fuels Supply � N/A 1998 N/A HighTank Gauging(ATG) System

Fuels FAS « Fuels Supply � N/A 1998 N/A Medium/Automated HighSystem (FAS)

Fuel Pipelines « ME/CADD Shop � N/A 1998 N/A Medium/? Fuels Supply High

SPAS FoxPro « Security Forces � N/A 1998 N/A Medium

PC3 « Security Forces � N/A Unknown N/A Medium



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Table 2. Summary of Existing Data Sources and Users (Cont.)



As-Builts ✓ Micro ✓ « ME/CADD Shop � Traditionally not 1998 Various Medium(recent ones Station ? Assoc CE/MOD used by others whoare electronic; ? Fire and Rescue rely instead on ME/older are paper) ? CE Utilities Maint CADD Shop updates

Hazmat Word ✓ « CE Environmental � CES Readiness 1997 Unknown UnknownManagement ? Security ForcesAction Plans ? CE Project Managers(MAPs) ? Wing Safety

? CE Building Mgmt? Fire and Rescue

Project Oracle, ✓ « CE Project Managers � CE Base 1998 N/A MediumControl withing DevelopmentManagement IWIMSSystem (PCMS)(Part of IWIMS)

Facility Access ✓ « CE Project Managers � All WIMS users 1997 N/A MediumUtilization 97 ? Real PropertyStudy (FUS)(see SpaceAllocation)

Asbestos, Access ✓ « CE Environmental � Bio-E 1998 N/A Medium/Lead Paint, (now : ME/CADD Shop HighOil/Waste moving ? CE Project ManagersSeparator Data to ? Assoc CE/MOD

Oracle) ? Fire and Rescue

Community ✓ ✓ « CE Project Managers � Wing Plans Unknown N/A LowHousing Plan

Explosive ✓ ✓ ✓ « Wing Safety � CES Readiness 1998 1"=2,500' HighClear Zones ? Fire and Rescue � CE PMs

? ME/CADD Shop � Bio-E? Flight Operations � CE Utility Maint? CE Base Development

Radio Hazard ✓ Micro ✓ ✓ « Wing Safety � Fire and Rescue Unknown 1"=5,000' HighMap Station � CES Readiness

� Security Forces

Andover SQL ✓ ✓ « CE Building Mgmt � CE PMs 1998 N/A HighControls Server ? Fire and Rescue � CE Customer ServiceInfinity � CE Facility Managers

� LAN Shop

Tree Survey ✓ ✓ « Assoc CE/MOD DEO � N/A 1997 1"=5,000' MediumOverlay toBase Map

Environmental Micro ✓ « CE Environmental � CE Base Development 1997 1:5,000 MediumOverlays to Station : ME/CADD Shop � Fire and Rescue (B-1/B-2)Base Map (maintains Map B-series) � CES Readiness(Map B) � Bio-E

Local Maps to .BMPs ✓ « CES Readiness � Bio-E 1997 1"=5,000' Medium25-Mile Radius used in « Fire and Rescue(Ordnance EIS (ArcSurvey Maps) View)

High-Altitude EIS ✓ « Fire and Rescue � Bio-E 1997 1"=10,000' MediumAerial Photos (Arc : CES Readiness(Raster) View)

2-6 SECTION 2


AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

Table 2. Summary of Existing Data Sources and Users (Cont.)



As-Builts ✓ Micro ✓ « ME/CADD Shop � Traditionally not 1998 Various Medium(recent ones Station ? Assoc CE/MOD used by others whoare electronic; ? Fire and Rescue rely instead on ME/older are paper) ? CE Utilities Maint CADD Shop updates

Hazmat ✓ ✓ « Fire and Rescue � Bio-E 1998 N/A Medium/Pharmacy � Security Forces HighData � CES Readiness

Hardstand ✓ ✓ « Command Post � Fuels Supply 1998 1"=5,000' Medium/Parking Sites/ � Security Forces HighAircraft � Fire and RescueMaintenance � CES Readiness

� MaintenanceOperations Crew

� Wing Plans

Consolidated « HQ/AMC and � Secure database not N/A N/A N/AAircraft ✓ ✓ Command Post available to all baseMaintenance ? Flight Operations organizationsSupport(CAMS)

IWIMS and IWIMS is an interim product for Civil Engineering, deployed until the full release of ACES. ACES is a user interface toACES Oracle tables and database structure. The community of ACES users at RAFM is expected to be the same as the current

WIMS/IWIMS users.

organization, but technology limitations don�t

support this structure for two reasons:

✈ Each organization has a particular need for the

geographically related data it uses, and some

have found it easier to build and maintain their

own data rather than sharing with other

organizations.

✈ Because of these unique needs, much of the data

that has been collected and built into electronic

datasets was developed by outside contractors.

Certain data structures may have been created for

a servicewide purpose, while others are unique to

RAFM. In either case, the disparity of datasets and

software to use this data can be traced to

individual contractors who typically recommend

software that they�re familiar with or that they

believe is the best available at the time.

The practice of copying and maintaining private

datasets is common, not only for DoD installations,

but also for government organizations and the

private sector as well. In many environments, it�s

almost an accepted �fact� that assembling,

structuring, and applying another organization�s

information takes more time than simply starting

fresh and maintaining a private copy. Up to this

point at RAFM, considering that much of the

information each user typically needs is a

combination of hardcopy and digital formats, that

assumption has been quite valid.

Table 2 above shows that several organizations are

using information with a common basis. Others

have unique data that is not�and in some cases is

not allowed to be�accessed by others.

Continued From Page 2-2



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Framework Data

As a result of the interview process, it appears that

there are three key datasets that all users share:

✈ Map C-1 (base layout mapping), currently

formatted to meet MGE specifications in

MicroStation

✈ Map G-series (utility infrastructure), currently

a combination of hardcopy and digital data in

MicroStation, but not yet MGE-compliant

✈ Floor plans, currently in vector format in

MicroStation as a result of the FUS completed

in 1997

For this strategic plan, we will refer to these three

datasets as framework data, upon which all

other information about RAFM is based.

Also as shown in Table 2, it�s clear that all this

framework data is housed in the 100 CES

organization, although it is used, managed, and

maintained by different groups within the

organization. For instance, the base map is

associated primarily with CEOM, the floor plans

with Real Property, and the utility infrastructure

information with Maintenance Engineering.

Overlay Data

For the purposes of this strategic plan, the

information that other organizations use on top of

the framework data�overlays that need the

framework data to be complete�is referred to as the

overlay data. This data can take many forms and

may be unique to each organization. Examples

include the following:

✈ Hazmat storage sites required by Security

Forces for public safety to locate and track

potentially dangerous materials

✈ Radio hazard sites required by Wing Safety

to pinpoint the locations of radio interference

sites

✈ Hardstand parking sites required by Wing

Planning and the Command Post for

bedding-down owned and transient aircraft.

Framework data (FIgure 10) includes the base map, while overlay data (Figure 11) includes more specific information.

2-8 SECTION 2


AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

Existing Conditions and NeedsAssessment of Geographically RelatedInformation

The following text summarizes the existing

conditions and needs identified during the briefing

and interview process in relation to geographic

information. Within the text, key players in the GIS/

data implementation project are identified by this

symbol: B.

✈ Command Post. This group uses base map

data for aircraft parking, but has no real need for

other framework data. (However, because of the

unique role that they play, they still need access

to many kinds of information ranging from

weather forecasts to the C2IPS.) Fuels and

Maintenance Engineering datasets are crucial

for them. All data requires tight security.

✈ Wing Plans. Wing Plans uses geographic data

to plan for billeting space and aircraft parking

during contingency planning or military

exercises. They need access to floor plans for

space allocation and to base map data for aircraft

parking. However, the need for secure data

means that Wing Plans isn�t likely to share

much information and will instead participate

in only one-way communication. This

organization needs base map data to tie to its

Consolidated Aircraft Maintenance Support

(CAMS) data. Because of the nature of Wing

Plans� operations, data needs are frequently

last-minute rather than ongoing.

✈ Wing Safety. Wing Safety isn�t currently using

any databases. They need more ability to bring

in geographic data for training graphics and

materials. They would easily use base maps and

floor plans to review and maintain information

on confined spaces and explosive safety clear

zones.

✈ Fuels Supply. This organization uses

geographic data from the base and utility maps,

with the emphasis on utilities. They have

automated systems that would benefit from GIS

tools but no dedicated CADD staff at this time.

Fuels Supply is linked to Flight Operations

because they need to know aircraft parking

schedules. In addition to geographically related

data, Fuels Supply also wants to automate data

that pertains to stock control and supply

management.

✈ Flight Operations. Flight Operations uses

geographic data from the base mapping for

aircraft parking, airfield maintenance and

management activities, and refueling operations

with fuels storage data. They really need central

coordination and communication tools because

scheduling aircraft parking and airfield

maintenance are major challenges.

✈ B Readiness. Readiness is a large user of

geographic data, from base maps and floor plans

to utilities. This organization has its own

software for plume modeling and references

regional Ordnance Survey mapping. Readiness

needs ability to bring MicroStation data into

ArcView for emergency use.

✈ B Real Property. This organization is a

major user of geodata, especially base maps and

floor plans. Real Property needs floor plans

linked to real property records for space

allocation tracking and planning. They also

need contingency planning. Facilities in the

framework data should reference the CD-ROM

Figure 12�The Command Post uses base map data foraircraft parking. Shown here are several KC-135Stratotankers, which are used by the 100th Air RefuelingWing based at RAF Mildenhall.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

records, allow �what if� scenario planning, and

permit updates to both graphic and nongraphic

data. Real Property would benefit the most from

geographic capabilities in IWIMS or ACES.

✈ B CE Project Managers. This group is a

major user of geographic data, especially for

project planning. They would benefit from

immediate access to framework data (base maps,

floor plans, and utility infrastructure). They look

forward to what they hear about ACES, so they

could really benefit from a geographic

component. These project managers need to

provide framework data to contractors on base,

but the base data is in MicroStation and the

contractors use AutoCAD. One captain is

familiar with Wright-Patterson Air Force Base

VISION and would like something similar for

RAFM. The project managers are also major

users of real property data, and they have several

needs for automation outside GIS.

✈ B CE Building Management. This group

has a large potential for GIS input and use. They

use very progressive automation�including the

Building Management System (BMS), Facility

Inspection Database, and Andover Controls

Infinity systems. Building Management needs

up-to-date base maps, floor plans, and utility

infrastructure data. Another dataset they need

that isn�t yet available basewide is internal

utility infrastructure equipment. Building

Management also manages pavements, so they

need base map information. All information is

needed real-time, so direct access to most recent

CADD files is critical. This group is using WIMS

and is looking for ACES to be an upgrade. There

is also an electrical dataset that is a transfer to a

relational database with links to geographic

data. That dataset that could benefit from GIS

applications.

✈ B Maintenance Engineering/CADD

Shop. This group, including Nigel Hutchinson,

maintains the current NT server, Oracle, and all

the CADD/GIS that�s been developed to this

point. Their use and maintenance of the

framework data is greater than anyone else�s,

although the emphasis is on maintaining the

data. Updates take place from contractor

documents/as-builts, but little happens with

utilities. ME/CADD has started GIS development

by pulling in facility information from WIMS,

which may not be the most up-to-date. They

have a great interest in GIS development, which

has begun with an MGE flavor. The group still

needs information on facilities, pavements,

utilities, inspections, BCP programs, new ACES

development, and floor plans.

✈ Associate CE/MOD. At RAFM, this is an

interesting function in that one person�Ian

Smith, Deputy Base Civil Engineer�manages US

facilities, while another person�Gary Ward�is

concerned with US use of MOD facilities. Much

of the data they access is from the old WIMS, so

they know ACES may help. They also work with

ME/CADD, Real Property, work requests, and

work-required processes. These two are

apparently the daily working arms of the BCE,

so access to GIS data, at least in report format,

will prove useful.

✈ CE Customer Service. This group handles all

the work requests from base customers, using

the WIMS 332s, 1219s, and digging permit 103s

for reference. They also take verbal service calls

Figure 13�Flight Operations uses geographic data fromthe base mapping for aircraft parking, airfield mainte-nance and management activities, and refuelingoperations with fuels storage data. Shown here is amidair refueling by the 100th ARW based at RAFMildenhall.

2-10 SECTION 2


AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

and provide facility manager training. Customer

Service would benefit from faster, better access

to framework data, but they usually haven�t yet

had direct input about changes, differences in

the field, and so on. They are active users of base

and utility maps, as well as floor plans when and

where available.

✈ B CE Environmental Flight. This is easily

the largest user of GIS-related data within CE,

second only to ME/CADD in how much they

need and use. Environmental has a laundry list

of needs and uses for framework data. Their

biggest need is simply to tie their existing

databases to the base map, floor plan, and utility

infrastructure data. Most all other base users will

need access to Environmental�s databases and

critical information.

✈ Fire and Rescue. This organization uses

various automated systems for modern fire

response and prevention, including software for

plume modeling, ALOHA from NOAA. They also

have an Emergency Information System (EIS)

from a private vendor. Fire and Rescue uses a lot

of base and utility maps, as well as floor plans.

They must maintain annual fire plan drawings,

so up-to-date maps, especially of floor plans, are

critical. (While not directly related to geodata,

greater access to basewide projects would make a

big difference for this group.) Current software is

ArcView-based. They also have raster aerial

photo enlargements of RAFM and extending out

29 miles from the base center. Any tie to GIS

must include the plume modeling capability.

✈ Communications Squadron. This

organization is not only a user/provider of GIS

information, but all information technology

developments must be approved and supported

by them. The Comm Squadron would likely use

base maps with floor plans if they were readily

available, as part of their role is to manage their

own infrastructure. They currently use tools

such as SUN Net Manager to constantly monitor

all network components. As GIS applications

and needs develop, the Comm Squad is likely to

be the host/designer/implementer of increased

data sharing.

✈ LAN Shop. This organization isn�t a user/

provider of GIS information, but all developments

must be approved and supported by them. The

LAN Shop would likely use base maps with floor

plans if they were readily available.

✈ B Security Forces. Security Forces is a big

user of framework data (base, utility, floor plans),

which is all of relatively equal importance to

their mission. They also need access to flight

schedules, crew billeting information, and so

on, for emergency response. Their main concern

is base defense and training for this mission. A

GIS tool that would automatically create

cordons, show locations of Hazmat storage and

transmission equipment, and so on, would be of

great benefit.

✈ Lodging Maintenance. This organization

applies large maintenance orders (AF 332s) and

smaller ones (1219s) to maintain 10 facilities

Figure 14�ALOHA is one of several modeling applica-tions used by Fire and Rescue at RAF Mildenhall. Abasewide GIS would have to be integrated with this andother modeling capabilities to be compatible with Fireand Rescue�s mission.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

with more than 400 rooms. About the only

graphic information they really need is the floor

plans. Faster access to better information would

be beneficial to them.

✈ C2IPS Operations. C2IPS, which is under

627th AMSS, manages and maintains a database

at HQ AMC at Scott AFB, Illinois. This is the

aircraft tracking mechanism worldwide, with

tightly secured information. This data should

probably not be accessible by other GIS users,

but ideally the C2IPS staff should have access to

the Fuels maps (Map G-7) and databases and

Map E-series with airfield operations and

aircraft parking-related data.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Section 3: Phase 1 Component Plan�Setting the Stage

Overview

The task of building GIS capabilities that can support

the information management needs of RAF

Mildenhall is as diverse and thus as complicated as

the very mission of the 100 ARW. The situation is

further complicated by the current circumstances of

technology, where system life cycles continue to

shrink, costs continue to drop, and all factors related

to function and performance continue to rise.

Decisions made today about computer hardware and

software procurement may be considered obsolete by

tomorrow�s technologies.

Because there is no way to wait until someone

designs the perfect system configuration, this

implementation plan must serve as a place of

beginning. Even as initial capabilities are being

developed, a second brief look is worthwhile to make

sure that goals are being met.

For RAF Mildenhall to stay on course with the GIS

implementation, the effort must be supported at top

levels of each organization. To that end, several

policy recommendations are essential to the success

of the technical recommendations that follow:

Recommendations

Adopt a Mission Statement

The administration should begin Phase 1 by defining

the mission for RAFM information sharing. For this

purpose, RAFM administration should create and

adopt either a mission statement or a list of

objectives for information systems used by the

various organizations. The mission should then be

administered by a GIS steering committee, as

discussed in the next recommendation.

The mission statement should be brief and direct. It

could be built on an acronym that relates to a symbol

of readiness at RAFM, or it could be a simple

statement. For an example of a more extensive

mission statement, see Figure 15 (right).

Figure 15�A sample Mission Statement for GIS Commit-tees

GIS Steering Committee

Basewide GIS: Public access to publicinformation�Providing information costeffectively1. Evaluate and recommend budgets and schedules for

hardware, software, and network infrastructure;training; staff; and operations

2. Identify interdepartment team-building opportunitiesand recommend structure/organization changes

3. Research and develop future policies4. Determine legal requirements5. Establish standards, administer user access (external

and internal), and approve security standards6. Communicate/coordinate with other governmental

jurisdictions7. Define the GIS technical committee role8. Keep top-level management informed9. Define technical support

GIS Technical Committee

Implement and support the basewide GISwith information and communication technology1. Determine needs and recommend hardware, software,

and network acquisitions2. Design a GIS infrastructure that allows data/

information sharing between users, maintains data

consistency, and eliminates data redundancy3. Design and recommend user access (external and

internal)4. Determine needs and recommend staffing changes and

training5. Design and recommend security standards

6. Identify application development needs7. Develop a data/system maintenance plan that includes

schedule, responsibilities, budgets, and transactional/periodic updates

8. Develop quality control procedures and responsibilities9. Develop and implement a database design that

encompasses standards (graphic and nongraphic),location of data, data structure and format, and data

transfer processes

3-2 SECTION 3

Phase 1 Component Plan�Setting the StageR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

The initial mission should be to ensure the successful

performance of this plan.

Establish a GIS Steering Committee

Simultaneously in

Phase 1, the

administration should

create a GIS steering

committee for Wing

Command information

systems to oversee the

implementation and administration of the system.

This committee will begin by concentrating on

administering the mission and objectivesset by the

administration and will ultimately establish and

administer GIS policy. Ideally, the committee must

meet on a regular schedule�at least monthly�but it

should consider meeting more often during the

assignment startup.

This committee should consist of one

management-level person from each of the

following:

✈ Command Post (100 ARW/CP)

✈ Wing Plans (100 ARW/XP)

✈ Wing Safety (100 ARW/SE)

✈ Flight Operations (100 OG)

✈ Deputy Base Civil Engineer (100 CES), to

represent organizations under the 100 SPTG,

including Real Property, Project Management,

Building Management Systems, Maintenance

Engineering, and Customer Service

✈ CE Environmental (100 CES)

✈ CE Fire and Rescue (100 CES)

✈ CE Readiness (100 CES)

✈ Communications Squadron (100 CS)

In addition to the policy-setting and administration

functions, this committee should be closely involved

in promoting the basewide GIS, especially among

senior staff. So, in effect, the members of the

committee will function as GIS ambassadors to the

RAFM community, under the guidance of the

committee chair, who should serve as a high-level

GIS champion throughout the organization.

This committee should report to the 100 Support

Group Commander or Deputy Wing Commander.

The committee should report at the same level as

committees like the facilities board or the financial

working group.

Establish a GIS Technical Committee

In addition to the steering committee, RAFM should

establish a GIS technical committee. The first order

of business for this group should be to adopt a

mission statement (see the example in Figure 15).

Chaired by the basewide GIS manager (see the next

recommendation), this committee will implement

the policy decisions made by the steering

committee. So this committee should be more

closely involved in day-to-day technical issues

relating to the configuration and use of the basewide

GIS. In addition, the technical committee should

advise the GIS steering committee on technical

issues. The chair of the technical committee should

be the liaison between the two groups. Like the

steering committee, this group must meet

regularly�at least monthly�but it should consider

meeting more often during the assignment startup.

This committee should consist of one technical

person from each of the following:

✈ Command Post (100 ARW/CP)

✈ Wing Plans (100 ARW/XP)

✈ Wing Safety (100 ARW/SE)

✈ Fuels Supply (100 LGS)

✈ Flight Operations (100 OG)

✈ Deputy Base Civil Engineer (100 CES) to

represent organizations under the 100 SPTG,

including Project Management, Building

Management Systems, Computer Services, and

Customer Service

GIS AmbassadorsEstablish a GISSteeringCommittee



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

✈ CE Readiness (100 CES)

✈ CE Real Property (100 CES)

✈ CE Maintenance Engineering (100 CES)

✈ CE Environmental (100 CES)

✈ CE Fire and Rescue (100 CES)

✈ Communications Squadron (100 CS) including

Network Control Center and Network

Management (LAN Shop)

✈ Security Forces (100 SFS)

✈ Lodging Maintenance (100 SVS)

✈ C2IPS Operations (627 AMSS)

This committee should report to the GIS steering

committee. A model for this relationship is the way

that the real estate working group is a subgroup of

the facilities board.

Although widespread GIS capability is not expected

to develop throughout RAFM until later phases, the

members of the technical committee will help guide

and learn from CE experiences in developing the GIS

tools. The GIS technical committee should strive to

represent the needs of the users and should also

attempt to understand and represent technical

knowledge that pertains to specific aspects of the

information systems. This committee will interact

with other information systems within CE to

coordinate activities that may overlap.

When fully developed, the technical committee can

also serve as a GIS user group, representing both the

most sophisticated and the most basic users

throughout the organization. This group can also be

involved in building core GIS competence

throughout RAFM. Because of the transient nature of

staff at RAFM, having a technical group that

preserves GIS expertise and participates in the

ongoing transfer of technical knowledge is essential.

Finally, like the steering committee, the technical

committee should also play a role in promoting

understanding and use of GIS technology

throughout RAFM, especially among technical staff.

Appoint a Basewide GIS Manager

The Wing Commander should appoint a basewide

GIS manager to coordinate development of the

system and to support the application needs of the

GIS users as the system is developed. The person

selected for this role must understand technical GIS

concepts and the CE role at RAFM.

Initially, the GIS manager�s major role will be to act

as program manager for the project overall,

overseeing the development and coordination of the

GIS and chairing the GIS technical committee. As

the assignment continues, the manager�s role should

become more visibly marketing-related, as a

technical GIS champion. In that role, the manager

will guide the GIS application development efforts

beyond maintenance of basic core data to support

the sophisticated analysis needs of the organization.

Considering the nature of the information, the

process by which framework data is created and

should be maintained, a CE background would be an

advantage for GIS development and maintenance.

The GIS manager should be highly skilled in

administering Microsoft Windows NT, Oracle,

Microsoft SQL Server, and Bentley MicroStation. In

particular, those skills should include system

administration experience and expertise in the

Oracle relational database management system

(RDBMS) and MicroStation CADD/GIS. In addition,

this person will need an understanding of CE data

creation and maintenance processes, the Tri-Service

Figure 16�GIS Managers should be skilled in several keynetworking and data management applications.

3-4 SECTION 3


AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

Figure 17�A sample GIS Manager position description.

Overview

The GIS manager heads the basewide GIS operation. This manager is the chair of the GIS technical committee and is a permanent member of the

GIS steering committee. The GIS staff may include full-time and part-time positions at the GIS analyst/programmer and/or GIS technician level.

The GIS manager is responsible for leading the development, implementation, and management of the GIS project. The manager is directlyinvolved with many CE organizations and with other organizations throughout the base. These organizations represent diverse points of view,

and each has a stake in the overall direction of the basewide GIS. The true emphasis of the GIS manager position is to coordinate and support thebasewide GIS functions.

This position has been created and is designated to function within CE; however, this position will also be guided by the GIS steering committee,

of which the GIS manager will be a member.

Qualifications. Because of the unique organizational structure of the GIS project, flexibility to work within acomplex governmental environment is critical. The GIS manager must have the following minimum qualifications:✈ Certification or a degree in a technical or scientific field such as computer-aided engineering, geography, mathematics, engineering, or

computer science

✈ Professional certification in at least one of the following:✯ Windows NT Systems and Network

✯ Network administration✈ At least three years of GIS-related experience including

✯ GIS project management✯ Use of Intergraph MicroStation software

✯ Use of ArcView software✯ Use or management of MGE-compliant and TSSDS-compliant mapping

✯ Knowledge of surveying principles relevant to GIS✯ Participation in or use of base mapping

✯ Knowledge of aerial photography relevant to GIS✯ Knowledge of computerized facilities management operations

✯ Knowledge of Internet utilities, such as web browsers, e-mail, and FTP✈ Relevant experience in application development or software development management using Oracle relational database management

systems✈ A customer-service�oriented approach to the various departments that will serve as primary in-house GIS clients

✈ Ability to train and facilitate a group of technical staff and to facilitate cooperation among GIS users✈ Knowledge of DoD organizations, interrelationships, and operating procedures

✈ Ability to communicate both orally and in writing with a wide range of audiences, including technical staff, managers, administrators,other government agencies, private businesses, and the public

✈ Ability to manage, coordinate, or interact with contractors for GIS-related services✈ Ability to articulate consensus and disagreement and to negotiate compromise

✈ Organizational skills for planning, assigning, and coordinating work✈ Knowledge of TSSDS requirements

Duties. The GIS manager is responsible for the following activities:✈ Chair the GIS technical committee.

✈ Serve as a permanent member of the GIS steering committee.✈ Advise the GIS steering committee on all GIS-related matters.

✈ Supervise the GIS project including GIS staff, contractors, and consultants.✈ Create specifications for GIS hardware, software, and data acquisition.

✈ Serve as the CE liaison in GIS-related matters with outside organizations.✈ Manage all GIS-related contracts.

✈ Create and manage budgets for GIS operations.✈ Assist in GIS software customization and application design/development.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Spatial Data Standards (TSSDS), IWIMS, and the

future release of ACES.

Figure 17 (left) lists the overall qualifications and

provides an example position description for the GIS

manager.

Establish a Computer Resources BoardAn option to consider is to form a computer

resources board, which could be chaired by the Vice

Wing Commander. Such a board could be

instrumental in maintaining long-term vision for

GIS and computer technology at RAFM. In time,

other groups could develop on the model of the GIS/

computer committees to fill roles related to

computer technology, compatibility, purchasing,

security, and technology forecasting. Through this

mechanism, GIS and information sharing would be

established on the same level as facilities and funds.

Build GIS Staff Qualifications

As mentioned in Figure 17, the GIS manager will be

expected to supervise GIS technical staff. These staff

members should be in two basic categories:

✈ GIS analyst/programmer

✈ GIS technician

Figures 18 and 19 list recommended qualifications

and example position descriptions for these two

levels of personnel. Ensuring that these basic

qualifications are met is especially important in a

military installation environment where staff

turnover is an ongoing challenge.

OverviewThe GIS analyst/programmer reports to the GIS manager. The analyst/programmer is responsible for application development, design, coding,

implementation, and documentation for applications specifically related to the GIS project. The GIS analyst/programmer will communicate withmany base organizations. These organizations require diverse applications, and each has a stake in the overall direction of the basewide GIS.

Qualifications. Because of the unique organizational structure of the GIS project, flexibility to work within acomplex governmental environment is critical. The GIS analyst/programmer must have the following minimumqualifications:✈ Academic certification or a degree in computer science or a related field✈ One to two years of GIS experience including

✯ At least one year of active coding in any third- or fourth-generation language✯ At least one year of application analysis and design for the following:

�MicroStation�Relational database management systems (Access and Oracle preferred)

�Windows95 and NT operating systems✯ One to two years� experience with Internet/intranet data dissemination systems

✈ Knowledge of DoD organizations, interrelationships, and operating procedures✈ Ability to communicate both orally and in writing with a wide range of audiences, including technical staff, managers, administrators,

other government agencies, private businesses, and the public✈ Organizational skills for planning, assigning, and coordinating work

Duties. The GIS analyst/programmer will be responsible for the following:✈ Perform application development including design, coding, testing, implementation and documentation.✈ Perform RDBMS programming.

✈ Create related documentation.

Figure 18�A sample GIS Analyst/Programmer position description.

3-6 SECTION 3


AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

Implementation and TrainingSchedule

The recommended timeframe for implementing the

recommendations in this section begins

immediately and continues at a more intense pace

through the end of FY99. Then the pace relaxes

somewhat to an ongoing process for the foreseeable

future.

To effectively carry out the recommendations

presented in this plan, the committee structure and

technical representatives must be in place. With the

guidance and technical expertise provided by the

committees and staff members mentioned in this

section, all future recommendations should be easier

to implement.

No training is identified in these recommendations.

OverviewThe GIS technician reports to the GIS manager. The GIS technician is responsible for creating, maintaining, and managing GIS data used in the

GIS project.

Qualifications. The GIS technician must have the following minimum qualifications:✈ College coursework in geography, mathematics, engineering, computer science, or a related field

✈ GIS experience (MicroStation experience preferred)✈ Experience with Windows95 and NT operating systems

✈ GIS data management and systems skills✈ Experience with and an understanding of the importance of accuracy and interrelationships of graphic and nongraphic GIS data

✈ Knowledge of TSSDS requirements for mapping creation and maintenance

Duties. The GIS technician will be responsible for the following:✈ Create and maintain data in MicroStation, according to TSSDS requirements.

✈ Produce plots and thematic maps.✈ Perform basic queries in Oracle.

✈ Perform basic GIS data file management.

Summary

In summary, the goal for this phase is fourfold:

✈ To build a strong GIS marketing presence and

technical knowledge base throughout RAF

Mildenhall

✈ To ensure that the GIS strategic plan is well

supported at high enough levels to secure

funding, but with a technical component to

ensure system capability

✈ To foster the development of GIS system

managers through involvement in a GIS

technical committee

✈ To foster the development of GIS champions

through involvement in a GIS steering

committee

Figure 19�A sample GIS Technician position description.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Section 4: Phase 2 Component Plan�Building the Hub of the Wheel

Overview

As determined during the base interviews in June

1998 and as stated in Section 2, a tremendous data

sharing opportunity exists at RAFM. While most of

the information�or framework data�is generated

within the 100 CES organizations, the potential is

there for many users to apply this information to

their own needs.

The keys to success in applying technology to meet

the needs of organizations that keep RAFM running

smoothly are integration and standards. These

elements represent the hub of the GIS wheel.

Data integration, which can be as simple as giving all

users access to the same basic information, will

determine the success or failure of any automation

initiative. Standards�which should be based on the

TSSDS from the Tri-Service CADD/GIS organization

at the Waterways Experiment Center, Vicksburg

District, US Army Corps of Engineers�will allow any

user on base to access data created and maintained in

CE and eventually in other organizations.

Changing the business practices of each user to

access the same framework data is the first step in

building the integrated data sharing that must occur

if RAFM is to effectively use technology. In order of

relative importance, the framework data to be shared

is as listed in the frame below.

Recommendations

Build the Base Layout Mapping

Base layout mapping (Map C-1) must be brought up-

to-date and have full

feature coding to meet

MGE compliance.

Facilities must be

polygons, and the

construction of a street

centerline network

needs to be completed. Because the most recent

aerial photography used for mapping was taken in

1994, the base maps could be updated if as-builts

were available for all demolitions and new

construction.

Beyond simple development of the base mapping,

these enhancements will significantly enhance the

base map quality and usability:

✈ Acquire new aerial photography or a new field

survey of the base to locate changes to physical

features. Where visible, changes should be noted

and a search of source documents such as as-

builts, IWIMS projects (Form 332), and field

notes from Maintenance Engineering staff

should be used. Updates to the MicroStation

data should be consistently performed and use

the most reliable source necessary.

Base LayoutMapping:Build the EssentialFramework Data

✈ Base layout mapping

✈ Floor plans

✈ Utility infrastructure mapping

✈ Real property data

4-2 SECTION 4

Phase 2 Component Plan�Building the Hub of the WheelR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

✈ Build Oracle/TSSDS nongraphic databases of

attribution about the base mapping. Using

existing source documents, as-builts, and reports

from the field, the nongraphic information

should be created to support at least facility,

airfield, and vehicle transportation ways.

Because much of the information now linked to

the base mapping facility features comes from

WIMS (and as such is considered outdated), a

future function should be to create an

automated way to upload nongraphic

information from the successor to WIMS and

IWIMS, which is the Automated Civil Engineer

System (ACES). The proposed deployment for

ACES was December 1998, and deployment for

CONUS bases and installations was set for April

1999. The Housing Office�s portion of ACES,

Housing Manager (ACES-HM), was fielded

during the third quarter of 1998.

This combination of graphic and nongraphic base

mapping framework data will begin to open the

door for users to pose queries that involve

particular information about the system. An

example query involves determining what

facilities will be affected if a certain valve is shut.

✈ Program a consistent update to make changes in

MicroStation files for demolitions, changes, or

new construction. Use all available as-builts and

supplement them with surveying as needed to

complete the base map updates.

✈ Confirm that all features meet TSSDS compliance

to link associated records to the base mapping.

✈ Consider exploring teaming opportunities with

other USAFE bases, such as RAF Lakenheath.

Building framework data first requires time on

site for contractors or USAF personnel, and a

significant cost savings can result when larger

areas are covered by one crew in one trip.

Build the Floor Plans

Floor plans must be

available in vector

format, they must be

updated to show current

and as-built

construction for new

facilities, polygons must

be created for space ownership, and they must be

spatially accurate and tied to the base layout mapping.

Beyond simple development of the floor plans, these

enhancements will significantly enhance the floor

plan quality and usability:

✈ The source for floor plans at RAFM is the digital

data created by Nakata (1995) to support the

FUS. This data can be used to start updating and

qualifying the information to be supplied to

base organizations. Using the latest

information�such as IWIMS or information

gathered by Fire and Rescue during its annual

assessment of facilities�ME/CADD staff

members should locate significant changes to

the already digitized floor plans. Where floor

plans have not yet been digitized, such as for

commercial facilities or the relatively limited

housing facilities at RAFM, make this digitizing

effort a priority for the ME/CADD staff members.

There are 534 MicroStation design files for the

available floor plans, which do not include services,

housing, or commercial facilities. These design files

are not all FUS-related files from Nakata, so they have

varying dates, parameters, and general consistency.

While rooms are all polygons, the floor plans do not

meet TSSDS requirements and have not been

updated since 1996.

✈ Applying TSSDS, all floor plan elements should

be feature-coded within MGE to meet standards

for linking to the base mapping. Once the

feature coding is complete, the floor plans can be

linked to the appropriate facilities on the base

maps. In this scenario, users would be able to call

up a base map, see the facility of interest, and

then drill down to the floor plans within that

Base Floor Plans:Build MoreEssential Frame-work Data



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

facility. This will involve not only reformatting

and updating the design files to meet TSSDS

requirements, but also georeferencing the floor

plan data for correct spatial identity.

✈ Because Real Property has maintained a large

amount of very important information, all

vector floor plans should be linked to the MS

Access 97 database built and maintained in Real

Property. With all floor plans available as vector

data, it would be possible to link the catcodes to

polygons within the floor plans.

By far, reaching this point with the floor plans

represents the most significant step in providing a

basis for GIS applications. From Table 2 in Section 2,

it�s clear that 12 of the RAFM user groups

interviewed�both inside and outside CE�rely on or

need access to good floor plan information.

Build the Utility Infrastructure Mapping

Utility infrastructure mapping poses possibly the

greatest challenge

because, to date, no

systematic field

verification has taken

place to locate utility

structures and lines or

to determine active or

abandoned status.

Information now

comes back to CE from

the field only when someone takes the time to tell

CE drafters or when the project is shown on a Form

332.

The following process will develop high-quality,

usable utility infrastructure data:

✈ The first step is to conform existing information

to TSSDS graphic requirements, making certain

that information is distinctly separate for

distribution (mains) or service (laterals) level

importance. Distribution level data has more

significance to a large number of users, while

service drops are important to a select group.

✈ The current process of converting the utility

system data from hardcopy 1:500 maps to

MicroStation MGE format files should continue.

This is an interim�but useful�process for

developing this important segment of

information. The conversion process so far

proves that much of the existing hardcopy

utility location information is outdated and

incomplete. Where information is still valid,

however, the physical location of the utility

lines and hardware features appears to be little

more than a meter or two off the surveyed

location. While not the strongest basis for

developing infrastructure information that will

be shared basewide, this is a place to begin, and

it will give users more information than they

currently have available in a hardcopy format.

✈ The next step is to build Oracle/TSSDS

nongraphic databases containing utility

infrastructure data. Using the existing Map G-

series documents, as-builts, and reports from the

field, as much nongraphic information as

possible should be created to describe the vector

data. This data then begins to open the door for

users to pose queries about the system. An

example query involves determining what

facilities will be affected if a certain valve is shut.

Based on information available from the Tri-

Service CADD/GIS Center, future releases of the

TSSDS will more thoroughly include

infrastructure data to better support GIS and

maintenance management applications.

✈ The fourth step will be to use field location

techniques�GPS receivers and data collectors�

to perform a thorough sweep of the installation.

This should take place to build a drawing of

accurate points that GIS analysts can later �tie

together� to digitally create each system. This is

the first real progress toward building highly

accurate utility infrastructure data. And at best,

it simply ties down the spatial locations of

utility hardware to submeter- or centimeter-level

positional accuracy. This step focuses on the

accurate collection of the data points.

UtilityInfrastructureMapping:Build MoreEssential Frame-work Data

4-4 SECTION 4


AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

✈ After those four steps, the final piece of this

puzzle is to field locate, trace, and include utility

lines, both at the distribution level and as

individual service drops. Without these drops,

engineering design and field work will continue

to require a thorough survey of the site, and

utility outages to individual facilities will

continue to occur. This step is, however, one of

the most costly and may well be left to

accomplish after other significant portions of

this strategic plan are complete.

The underlying key for successful implementation of

the utility infrastructure data is positional accuracy.

Although it is possible to obtain centimeter-level

accuracy, RAFM users can have submeter-level

surveys that tie information much more closely than

what now exists. The resulting data will serve as a

very strong framework for other users� overlays.

Without a thorough investigation, the utility

infrastructure data may function as an adequate

reference, but it is likely to be used in the field by

Maintenance Engineering and emergency services

only if physical placement is accurate.

In general, framework data must be up-to-date,

TSSDS-compliant, and�most of all�maintained

regularly. Although much progress toward a TSSDS

data structure has occurred, full conversion is not

complete and CADD drafters are not all comfortable

or knowledgeable about these requirements.

As for base mapping, an important consideration is

to explore teaming opportunities with other USAFE

bases, such as RAF Lakenheath. This approach can

save costs for the base in the long run.

Build the Real Property Data

The Real Property

Office in the 100 CES

oversees the

management of the

more than 2 million

square feet of facilities

that make up RAFM.

Their responsibility�to

keep accurate records of

these facilities to support space assignments,

maintenance, and future planning for space

allocation�is one of the most critical onbase. Long-

term planning for base development relies heavily on

the data created, maintained, and managed by this

organization.

A great deal of data automation has taken place in

the office. Office staff members have built an Access

database that has created an automated space

allocation system using building category codes

(catcodes). This system is available for use over the

intranet. It�s possible to determine if a proposed use

is appropriate, based on catcode, for planning

purposes. At this time, a graphic component has not

yet been created.

These are the key items to address for increasing the

functionality of the real property data:

✈ Update and digitize all floor plan data. Floor

plans may be as much as five years old, when

they were surveyed to form the basis for the FUS.

Changes and moves have taken place, but they

may not have all come into CE Maintenance

Engineering for updates. This could be

accomplished by a combination of as-builts and

field survey.

✈ Bring all floor plans into the MGE environment.

As a logical progression to creating up-to-date

digital floor plans, this data should become

MGE-compliant.

✈ Link updated floor plans to Real Property

records. Real Property has a wealth of useful

information that doesn�t yet have a geographic

Real PropertyData:Build MoreEssential Frame-work Data



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

relationship to graphic data. Rooms in buildings

should have systematic, consistent numbers that

can be linked to real property records. Data that

resides in IWIMS, or ACES in the near future,

should have a means for linking to graphic data.

Real Property�s role is to support the base through

space allocation. Through the kinds of automation

discussed above, real property data, which is useful or

even critical to a large number of organizations at

RAFM, will become accessible for a wide variety

of uses.

Staff Resources and WorkOrder Development

The processes described in this section combine

onbase activity with services required from offbase

resources. AFRES and ANG guard personnel who are

supplied to RAFM during two-week maneuvers can

be used to supplement onbase support. Outside

contractors can be called on to provide the very

specialized services that only a handful of companies

have the experience to provide.

The personnel or organizations that are selected to

assist RAFM or to completely provide the services

needed to prepare the data for sharing among base

users should use this section of the strategic plan to

formalize a scope of work that specifically addresses

each part of the data development. A thorough

assessment must be part of this assignment, as a

significant investment has been made by RAFM in

creating much of the existing data and it should not

be overlooked.

Budget Estimates

✈ Base Mapping. The current Map C-1 base

mapping information is maintained in

MicroStation/MGE format and is sufficient to

provide a basis for future development. Updates

to the base mapping began during the first

quarter of 1999 as part of the survey to update

the airfield criteria information, which is

collected from field inventories.

A future consideration should be the complete

construction of a consistent base map from new

aerial photography. This process would include

ground control, new aerial photography,

complete photogrammetric compilation of base

mapping features at 1:500, creation of new

MicroStation/MGE-compliant data files, and�

finally�generation of digital orthophoto images

at 0.25- to 0.5-meter resolution. Depending on

the amount of preparation the base provides over

the years before initiating this data collection, as

well as technology advancement and individual

preferences, the budget for this process can range

from $US 200,000 to $US 500,000.

✈ Floor Plans. Because floor plans already exist

in a vector format, many will simply need

updates to make them useful. TSSDS does not yet

recognize many of the needs for this data,

especially from a facility management

perspective, but the developers of the TSSDS

know this and plan to make up for it within the

next two releases.

For now, the updates could take place within the

100 CES. There are two ways this can happen:

✯ Use changes indicated by Fire and Rescue as

they survey structures to update their

preliminary fire plans.

✯ Perform a search of as-builts to determine

where changes have occurred and modify

the floor plan digital files to bring them up-

to-date.

A safe estimate is that the two options above will be

combined and that two ME/CADD technicians,

probably a sergeant and an assigned airman, will be

available for this process. Between the two, about 45

to 50 hours per week could be committed to this

effort. Estimating that these staff could accomplish

about 40,000 square feet per week, the entire 2

million square feet of space at RAFM could be

updated within nine to 12 months.

✈ Utilities. Updating and developing this digital

information is also a two-step process, first to

4-6 SECTION 4


AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

digitize all the existing information based on

the 1:500 scale hardcopy maps and later to

accomplish a field-surveyed utility update.

The initial updating should be assigned to a

single technician to maintain consistency in

reviewing documents, digitizing, and

performing quality control on the data as it

digitized. Assuming that an ME/CADD

technician can devote 30 hours per week to this

effort, the entire utility infrastructure could be

updated and digitized within 12 months. This

estimate does not include extensive field work,

but it could be supplemented with GPS surveys

if the capability to perform this function grows.

The second stage of developing the utility data

conversion can take on different flavors, ranging

from a GPS location survey to identify utility

hardware points for digitizing lines at a

workstation (probably to submeter positional

accuracy for the survey), to an in-depth survey

that includes tracing overhead and underground

lines as well as establishing a higher level of

positional accuracy of the utility hardware.

Estimating these efforts will require

additional information, including an

understanding of technology and

techniques at the time each effort is

scoped, the ability of RAFM staff to

support survey crews and needs, and the

resulting GIS application goals that

ultimately drive the data collection

requirements. The following scenarios for

data collection and creation provide some idea

of potential budget requirements:

✯ Perform a GPS field location inventory of

utility infrastructure hardware. Once

located and mapped, these features become

the �points� from which existing utility

data can provide the �lines� to tie them

together. This method could apply real-time

kinematic (RTK) GPS survey procedures to

accurately locate the structures and record

items such as type and number for later GPS

applications. This would be considered a

basic-level approach to building this

information and may well not include the

communications system components that

are maintained separately by the 38 EIW at

Tinker AFB, Oklahoma.

Estimated budget (in nearest $US 25,000) for

the RTK survey data collection effort is

approximately $US 200,000.

✯ Perform a GPS field location inventory of

utility infrastructure information, to

include tracing distribution mains and

service drops to create the basis for each

system. This process would follow similar

RTK procedures as the first example, with a

much greater depth of information

collection. Using this method, existing

utility documents will serve as the source for

system attributes, to be attached as

nongraphic information. In all likelihood,

just as above, communications data will

come from effort of the 100 CS and 38 EIW

and would not be field collected.

Estimated budget (in nearest $US 25,000) for

the RTK survey data collection effort is

approximately $US 725,000.

✈ Real Property. This linkage is a potential one-

step operation to connect physical and database

sources, realizing that some connections aren�t

possible and that some simply aren�t allowed.

Time to perform this effort must include a

thorough review and quality assessment of the

linked data and the establishment of tools and a

user interface to enhance use of this

information.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Justification and Impact Statement

Gathering accurate information and sharing a

centrally maintained and managed database using

web-based applications will ensure that everyone

uses the same, most current information. The

applications are numerous:

✈ The Fire Department has the most recent

information about hazardous/explosive material

stored in facilities on base.

✈ Security Forces know where all high-value

resources are located.

✈ Contractors and civil engineering craftsmen can

accurately locate utility lines and prevent the

expense and nuisance of cutting utility lines.

✈ During a contingency operation, staff in the

Command Post can use current information

concerning maps and floor plans and know that

the very same information is being used by the

Security Forces, Fire Department, Disaster

Preparedness, Safety, and Explosive

Ordnance experts.

Responses to emergencies, preparation for exercises,

construction clearances, utility outage alerts, and

beddown alternatives can all be managed using one

accurate database that is easily accessed

electronically. Labor cost savings can be significant

in two areas:

✈ Labor that is no longer needed to copy and

distribute data

✈ Labor that is no longer used to maintain

duplicate copies of the data

Money and time saved by not disrupting utilities can

also be used productively by the installation. One

CONUS command installation estimates that more

than a million dollars is saved each year because it

has reduced utility interruptions by having accurate,

accessible utility information.

This initiative makes good business sense for

Mildenhall because of the significant investment in

infrastructure with the fiberoptic LAN currently in

place. Providing accurate data that is easily accessible

to base users over the existing LAN increases the

base�s return on investment.



recommendations in this section is divided into two

parts:

✈ Short-term goals involve ongoing efforts and

focus on the use of existing information. These

goals should be accomplished by the second

quarter of FY00.

✈ Long-term goals involve verification and

enhancement of existing information, new data

acquisition, and significant project planning.

These goals should be accomplished by the

fourth quarter of FY02.

No additional training is identified in these

recommendations.

Summary

In summary, the goal

for this phase is to

establish the framework

data as the well-

maintained, single

source for all overlay

data to be used for any

GIS application

development.

As mentioned for base layout mapping and utility

infrastructure mapping, RAFM should consider

teaming with other USAFE bases, such as RAF

Lakenheath. Such a teaming arrangement could

result in a significant cost savings.

Realize Savings:Team with OtherUSAFE Bases forthe Mapping Effort



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Section 5: Phase 3 Component Plan�Building the Spokes of theWheel

Overview

This section concerns sharing framework data with

other basewide users to build new GIS capabilities

and improve existing ones. These are the spokes of

the GIS development wheel.

From the hub of strong framework data, the spokes

are created to provide access to basewide users. With

this framework data, users can develop and use their

own overlay data. This is the next critical step in

spreading GIS applications across the base.

In this scenario, the updated, consistent framework

data becomes the basis for all geographically related

information systems that are in use at RAFM. This

means that all data incorporated into other software

programs or simply used for reference is the same

basewide. For example, the goal in this phase is to

give capability so that Fire and Rescue can use the

same basic information that Readiness accesses,

creating a more closely aligned response to any

emergency situation.

The recommended actions for building the GIS

spokes include the following:

✈ Confirm network connection to appropriate

computer resources in each organization.

✈ Establish computer automation resources to

support GIS/automation capability and data

sharing within all organizations.

✈ Establish standard practices for information

sharing between CE-based framework data and

users of overlay data in other organizations.

✈ Combine the �Air Force Civil Engineer

Automation Vision� of May 1996 and the goals

of the GIS/Data Implementation Strategic Plan to

establish automation capability for basewide

users to access and share the critical framework

and, eventually, overlay data to support RAFM.

Recommendations

Confirm Network Connections

The results of the June

1998 existing

conditions baseline

interviews show that

between the LAN Shop

and the Comm Squad,

RAFM users are well

positioned to connect to a centralized data-sharing

environment.

According to the data collected from the LAN Shop

interviews, RAFM has an ATM infrastructure with a

fiber backbone. The shop currently runs Novell 4.1

and Windows NT 4.0 network operating systems, but

they are planning for a single NT 5.0 operating

system in 1999. As the monitors for information

security (Information Protection Office), they are

well equipped to handle data sharing both from an

operations and a security standpoint.

The Comm Squad has also been instrumental in

planning for and providing modern automation

communications among all facilities at RAFM. They�re

well aware of technical improvements in network

technology and, with their strong working

relationship with British Telecom, can be counted on

to provide strong capabilities for data sharing at

the base.

Confirm NetworkConnections:A Strong Platformfor Data Sharing

5-2 SECTION 5

Phase 3 Component Plan�Building the Spokes of the WheelR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

From all indications, both the LAN Shop and Comm

Squad meet or exceed the recommendations of the

AFCESA automation plan.

Establish Computer AutomationResources

The Air Force Civil

Engineer Automation

Vision provides a basis

for decisions for

acquiring sufficient

computing resources to

support different types

of users. The Air Force

Civil Engineer Support Activity (AFCESA) document

outlines users at four levels:

✈ CADD/GIS ✈ Administration

✈ Commander ✈ Midlevel Manager

Each has a slightly different computer configuration

that is based on the group�s potential needs,

although at a glance it appears that the commander�s

configuration is based on applications that require

more user learning commitment than may typically

be expected from this level of staff.

All specifications set forth in this document reflect

minimum requirements; as a general rule, AFCESA

suggests establishing higher standards where

applicable.

Table 3. Recommended Hardware Configurations

Item CADD/GIS Commander Administration Midlevel Manager

CPU Pentium Pro/166 MHz Pentium 133 MHz Pentium 133 MHz Pentium 100 MHz laptop

RAM 64 MB 32 MB 32 MB 40 MB

VRAM 4 MB 2 MB 1 MB 1 MB

Cache 512 KB 256 KB 256 KB 256 KB

Floppy Drive 3.5-inch 3.5-inch 3.5-inch 3.5-inch

Hard Drive 2.0 GB (EIDE or SCSI) 1.0 GB (EIDE or SCSI) 1.0 GB (EIDE or SCSI) 800 MB

CD 8X CDW ROM with a 6X CDW ROM with a N/A CD player with16-bit sound card 16-bit sound card sound card

Graphics 3D graphics N/A N/A N/ACard accelerator card

Monitor 21-inch color 17-inch color 17-inch color 17-inch 1280 x 10242-megapixel programmable programmable color monitor

programmable (when docked)

Modem 28.8 bps data/fax modem 28.8 bps data/fax modem 28.8 bps data/fax modem 28.8 bps PCMCIAQdata/fax modem

Other Tape backup N/A N/A Docking station with Devices (optional) SVGA, PS/2 keyboard

and mouse

These are recommendations only, and individual cases will create different needs. For example, because users at RAFM are connected tonetwork servers where shareable data should be stored, individual tape backup hardware and software may not be required.

The items listed in this table reflect the automation plan dated 07 May 1996.

EstablishComputerAutomationFourFour Levels ofUsers



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

The AFCESA document identifies four different

requirements, based on the type of user:

✈ CADD/GIS users are understood to be ME/

CADD or similar technicians; these are the staff

members charged with creating and

maintaining information about the base.

✈ Commander refers to high-level managers who

have a great need to use and display graphic

data.

✈ Administration refers to administrative, or

office, personnel and may likely represent the

largest number of users.

✈ Midlevel managers, while not a specific DoD

rank, are those staff members likely to be

responsible for programs or mission-specific

initiatives that require a high level of TDY time

away from their individual work spaces and must

have the flexibility of a laptop.

Table 3 lists the four configurations, adapted from

the AFCESA recommendations:

Two points to consider before any making any

hardware or software purchases are as follows:

✈ RAFM must determine the effectiveness of

existing computer resources that may closely

match those mentioned.

✈ It�s important to consider the current computing

capabilities at the time of the planned purchase.

It is anticipated that this strategic plan document will

help focus purchasing decisions toward specific items.

However, planning a computer purchase even 12

months out is next to impossible. Conditions change,

and hardware and software available in 1996 will not

match what is available in 1999. Nor will 1999

specifications match 2001 automation practices, and

so on in the future. This table is presented only as a

place to start the purchase planning cycle and is not

meant to be a complete, up-to-date source for defining

computing requirements.

Establish Information Sharing Practices

The first step in making

GIS a basewide resource

is to ensure the

availability of

framework data as a

basis for the users�

overlay data. By using

the same framework

data, all users can count on having similar

information available; this single consideration will

make it much easier to bring new users into the

operation.

There are many important reasons for increasing the

use of framework data basewide:

✈ TSSDS requirements are beginning to be met

DoD-wide, so new users to RAFM will

understand the structure of the framework data.

This understanding will lead to faster

orientation to their new working environments.

✈ TSSDS structured framework data can be presented

to all outside contractors by any organization on

base, whether for design of a new facility or as the

basis for new software applications.

✈ Sharing the same framework data also makes

sense from an emergency standpoint. If one

source is unavailable, then other users can

immediately count on what is available.

✈ One of the benefits of having all users share

framework data is the opportunity for users to give

input into maintaining that data. As other

organizations take to the field using the framework

data, they are likely to find differences on the

ground that are not all represented on the

framework data. These can be changes to the as-

builts or simply changes that were never called to

CE�s attention for map maintenance.

EstablishInformationSharing Practices:The EssentialFramework Data

5-4 SECTION 5

Phase 3 Component Plan�Building the Spokes of the WheelR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

Staff Resources and WorkOrder Development

The Air Force intent is for CE and Comm to work

together in providing GIS application support. For

that to happen, sharing resources is necessary, which

can mean staff resources as well as automation

resources. In all cases, Comm should ensure that CE

and other organizations are connected to ensure

smooth data sharing.

Table 3 in this section lists recommended hardware

configurations. Whenever CE or Comm is ready to

make GIS-related hardware purchases, a list of the

standard hardware configurations should be

provided to the vendor or vendors as part of the

purchase order. To ensure that the base takes

appropriate advantage of the latest technology

advances, this list should be periodically updated by

an entity like the Computer Resources Board

recommended in Section 3.

Any GIS-related hardware purchases should also be

guided by the DoD hardware/software contracts, such

as the Navy Facilities (NAVFAC) CAD-2 contract.

Budget Estimate

Because of the fast-paced nature of advances in

hardware, software, and networking, budget

estimates for planned acquisitions should be

produced when the base is ready to make the

purchases.

In general, each GIS-participating organization

should budget for at least one administration-level

workstation acquisition per year, as defined in Table

3. This should include both the hardware and

software needed for an administration workstation.

In addition, budgeting for additional hardware and

software upgrades or acquisitions should be reviewed

twice a year. Having two budget reviews will

accommodate the annual budget cycle and will

enable the base to make the best use of unused funds

at the end of the budget year.

Justification and Impact Statement

The recommendations in this section build on the

previous recommendations. This incremental

building process will preserve RAFM�s investment in

carrying out the previous recommendations by

ensuring that an increasingly wide range of qualified

users can access and benefit from the available data.

As mentioned in Section 4, this data will support the

full range of missions and activities carried out by

base organizations�from day-to-day maintenance

activities to disaster preparedness and emergency

response.

The effort, time, and capital investment required to

develop consistent, up-to-date installation-level data

is worthwhile for RAFM, especially when that

investment is enhanced by new tools that will

further encourage effective use of the data. RAFM

users will benefit from a thoughtfully planned and

executed approach that provides current computing

technology to each user organization mentioned in

this plan. Realizing the potential for each user to

access consistent information about the base�

whether for operations planning or for emergency

response�will prove to be a cost-effective way to

ensure that facilities and infrastructure at RAFM

meet the challenges of their missions.



recommendations in this section is open for

discussion as other needs take precedence. The

recommendations stated in this section ideally

should occur during development of the framework

data. The more users have ready access to

information, the more likely support will grow for

increased GIS access and application development.

At the very least, as the framework data described in

Section 4 becomes a more trusted source for basewide

users, the tools must be in place for accessing the

GIS-related data.

Although no formal training is identified in these



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

recommendations, it must be mentioned that

changes in business practices require

communication, defined methods for access,

appropriate use, and definition of quality of the data.

As more users access the GIS-related data, they must

be aware of the quality of the information in use and

assistance, as needed, to enhance the use of this

information.

Summary

In summary, the goal

for this phase is to

connect all users who

want to be connected

so that they can access

framework data and

begin to use it for GIS

overlays that will support a wide variety of day-to-

day activities.

GIS FrameworkData:Make It Accessibleto All Base Users

��

��

��

��

��

�

�� !�"�� #$%��&��'��

()��)��*

��

� ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

!��"��#��

��

��

��"��

�� $�� "

� ��!��#�� %��"��

�� "��

��$��& ��

��

��

��

��'

✈ ��

��

��

��

✈ ��

��"��

��(��

✈ ��)��*��

��+%��

��

✈ ��

��"��

��

��

�� +%��

✈ ��

��,��"

�� "��

��

��"��

�� "��

��

��

�� '�+�$ ��,��*��- � �.��

��(��-��

.��-��

��/�0!%

��

��0�

� ��"��

��

��#0!-��.��

�� "��

��

��/�0!%��

��-��.��-��

��) �� *��

�� +��

�� #��01�� /�0!%�

��

��

��

��

��/ ��

�� !�"�� #$%��&��'��

��

��

��

��

��

��-��.��-��+0 ��

��

��#0!-"�� 1��-��+0

��"��-�%��"�%�#�

0��2��"�0 ��0 �+0 ��

��"��$��+��

$��-��.��-��(��

��

��

/��"��

��3� ��!��4"

��-��.��-��

��"��"��

��3�� 4��

��

�� -��

.��-��"��

��

��

��

�� #0!-'

✈ ��-��.��-��5�6

✈ %�#��-��$�7��-��5�8

✈ 0 ��-�� 9�8

0��

��"��

�� (�

�� "��#0!-��-��

��"��-��

��

��-��

�� /�0!%�

��)�� "% ��0 ��&��

#�� ,"��-��

�� :�� "��

��

��

#0!-�

;��"��

��1 ��

��

�� #0!-��

��

��

��

#0!-"��

��

��

��

�� "

��

��

��

��"��

�� 3��4��

��

��

�� & ��1�

��

��"��

��

�� "

��

��-��.��-��

��"�� -��

!��<��2�� .��2��

1��=��"��-��

��

��,��

��

#0!-(��& ��

��3+$��4��(�

��

� ��

��"��

��+$��

� ��7 ��(�

��

#0!-(��

��+$��

��

��)��*��

��

��!��

��"��

��#��

��1��

��

��

��

��

�

��

�� /��)��*��

��#0!-��

�� "��

�� "��"�� +$��

��

��#0!-�

��

%�� -��

.��-��

�� +%�

��"�+%��

��,��)��

��*� ��

��

��

��

��

��#0!-��& ��

�� +0

�� -��.��-��"��"

��

�7�� .��-��

��,�� +0

�� $��

�7��3� �� 4��"�.��

-��7��

��"��

�� +0 ��

��

1��"�#0!-��

��

��1��#0!-(��

�� "��

1��<��3��4��

�� '

✈ 0��"�<��

��0�� ;��

��"��

��7��

��

✈ 0��"�<��

��

��-�� <��

��

� ��-��"��

��-��

��3� �>4"�� 0 �+0 ��

3� .�4��

� ?!��+%� ��

��

��

��"��

$��"��

��%��

2��

��,��

��

��-��+%$-��

��

<�� 688��0#.��

�� <��

��688��0#.��"��

��

��@��"�<��"��

��68�� "��

��

��68"��<��

� ��

��-��.��-��"��

�� .��-��

��"��

�� ,��

<��#��

.��-��"�� "�#0!�-��

��68��

��!��

��"��'��

��<��"��

<��

��! ��

�� !�"�� #$%��&��'��

��

��

��

��

��

��%��/3#�� *�+�� &��*4

1. User logs in

3. System activates webapplication

5. User selects building(wants to view floor plan)

4. Application displays area map CEWeb Map Server

Comm or CESecurity Server

CEDocument Server

CommMail Server

6. Dialog box requests floornumber and A/E/C layers to

display and prompts user for viewor redline mode

10. System displays floor plan withappropriate A/E/C disciplines

7. User fills in dialog box andselects OK button

CEDatabase Server

a. User views and/or prints document

b. User redlinesdocument

8. For redline mode, systemchecks to see if redline network

license is available

9. If license not available, systemstarts view mode with appropriate

message

2. System checks users loginagainst security access

11. System saves redline toappropriate redline directory

12. System e-mails CAD groupwith redline information

13. CAD group receivese-mail and logs in redline

14. System e-mails log number touser

15. CAD group requests redline forupdate of as-built

16. System retrieves redline andoverlays onto existing

as-built

17. CAD group completes updateof as-built

18. System replaces existing withnew as-built and archives redline

and old drawing

19. CAD group closes redline inredline book

20. System notifies user thatredline is complete withmodifications added to

as-built

User

System

System Connection

Process Flow

��5��

��

��

��

��

�

��"��"��

��

�� +%��

0��

��"��

��

��

��

��1 �

�� "��

��

!�� 58��

��

��,��'

6� 0�#0!-��

5� �� (��

�� "��

��"��

��"��

��

�� "

��"

�� "��

�� ,��

✯ !��

✯ >�,��+0 A��

��

✯ ��

��

� ��

✯ !��"��

��

�(��

� ��

�� "��

��B��0!+%�0

�� "��

��

C� ��-��.��-��"��

��"��

��%,��"�� .��DB��>��

9� ��-��"��

� �� 3�/�4"��

��

B� �� ,��7��

��:��"��

��

E� 0��,��

��"��0A%A+��"��

��

�� (��

�� "��

��:��"��

F� ��

�,��$G��,��

H� !��"�� (�

��

��

D� ��"��

�� "��

��,��

68� ��,��

�� '��

�� "

��1 ��

��"��,��

66� 0��

��"��

��

2

5

25

300

��-��

+0 A��

#��

��2��

��%��/�#��%�� &��% �� 4

��

�� !�"�� #$%��&��'��

��

��

��

��

��

65� $��"��

��+%$-�+0 A��

��

6C� +%$-��

��

��,��

69� !��+%$-��

� ��"��

��

��

6B� +%$-��

�� +%��"��

��

6E� ��

��,��

6F� +%$-�� "

��

��

6H� ��,��,��

��"� ��

��

6D� +%$-�� )��*

58� ��

��"��

��"��

��(��

!�� 58"��E�9"��

��&��%%�� )��

1��

��

��

��5��

��

��

��

$��

��

��

��

�� (��

��"��

��

#��

��"��

��

�� & ��"��

��

.��0 ��

0��"� ��

�� "��

��

��)��,��*�$��

��

+��

��"��"��

��/�0!��"

��

/��7 ��.�-��

�� "��7��"��"��

��- ��

��& ��

�� 0��

!/��"��& ��"

��(��"��

� ��@��"��

��,��

�� )��*��(��

�"��!��&��

��"��

��'��(

��%)��

��6��

��

��

��

��

�

��

�� (�

��"�� I

.��"��

��-��

��

�� ,��

��

��'

✈ /��

✈ /��#0!-

✈ /�� #0!-

✈ /��

✈ #��+%��

✈ <��

✈ ��

�� "��

��#0!-

�� 1�� ,��

��

��

��1��

��"�� (

��

��

$%��

��

��"��

� ��

!��"��<��

��

+%�� /�

��J/��55F��

��-��.��-��& ��

��

�� "

� ��"��

��"��

<+��-��$��

��

��-��.��-��"�� & ��

��

7% �&��

�� "�#0!-��

��'

✈ !��"��

��

��

✈ ��"��

�� "��

��

��

"8�2 �� 92��&��"��:

�=++B6800 85880 65�+� ��/��.��>�� J/��58"888

�=++B6800 85861 /��2��5�8��5�6�� J/��H"888

�=++B6800-858601 DE�+� ��/��.��>��3��4 J/��C8"888

�=++B6800-85861 /��2��5�8��5�6��3��4 J/��65"888

�� !�� "��#�$�% ��&��'��'��"�� (��)��&��

��; ��

�� !�"�� #$%��&��'��

��

��

��

��

��

��"�#0!-��

��

��

��

��1��#0!-� ��

�� "

#0!-��

��

��(��

$��"��

��

��

��1 ��(��"��

��

��

��.��

��"

#0!-� ��

��

�� .��%��

��

�,��& ��!K88

�� & ��!K86�

��"�+��+%

��

��C��

��"��$��

��"��-��.��-��<��

�� "��

�� 3�/�4��

��658��

��&��'��

��#��"��

��

��

��

6H8��

��0��"��

��"�� #0!-

��& ��:��

��

0��DBL�� -��6DDD"

��1��"��

�� K��

�� >0�$

��

#0!-��"��

��

� ��

�� #0!-��

��

��"�� "

��#0!-��

��

��

��/��

�%��-

�� "��

��

��

��

��

�� (

��

��

�� "��

��



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Section 7: Plan Maintenance and Revision

Overview

The investment made by the 100 CES in developing

this strategic plan will be recognized for years to

come. However, just as any plan for base

development grows and changes, so must this GIS/

automation strategic plan.

According to the American Planning Association

(APA), a comprehensive plan �is a document that

provides a community with a reference for how

development can best be accommodated at present

and in the future.� The comprehensive plan

established by RAFM is indeed a living, working

document that provides the path for current and

future base development. Associated programs such

as the FUS help make certain that users have solid

information on which to assign space and make

decisions for the future.

In a different light, the APA recognizes that

�strategic planning differs from other types of

planning . . . it is a management tool to aid

decision-making, but the decisions it is intended

to affect are more limited in scope.

Implementation is important in all planning,

but successful strategic planning focuses on:

implementation, measuring progress,

continuous monitoring, evaluation,

redeployment of resources, and adjustments.�

Strategic planning can be thought of as an ongoing

cycle of �plan, do, check, act.�

With these qualifications in mind, this section

concentrates on the reevaluation of the GIS/Data

Implementation Strategic Plan. The reasons vary and

the purposes for automation tools will change, and

the nature of technology dictates that changes will

occur. Changes will occur in hardware, software, and

data requirements as well as how people apply these

tools. RAFM is not immune from these changes

and�as technological developments occur�should

be poised to reconsider this plan on a regular basis.

Maintenance of the Strategic Plan

Because of the nature of changes in technology,

people associated with any form of the computer

industry look to a life cycle of about 18 months for

any new technology. When one provider brings new

software to the market hoping to gain the lead entry

position, its competitors follow in a short time with

�improvements� over all past software releases. Even

in the rare cases where a software product doesn�t

have strong competition, it is still likely to be

affected by other market changes, such as hardware

and operating systems, which help to drive updates

and new versions.

An ongoing purpose of the steering and the

technology committees established as part of this

plan should be to review this entire document at

least once a year. This annual update should focus on

the following:

✈ Status of the phases of implementation and

GIS/automation development as suggested in

this plan

✈ Status of software available or expected to be

implemented as part of this plan

✈ Status of hardware available or expected to be

implemented as part of this plan (especially in

consideration of updates to the Air Force Civil

Engineer Automation Vision)

7-2 SECTION 7

Plan Maintenance and RevisionR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

✈ Status of software in use in the various

organizations at RAFM

✈ Status of budgets and performance to determine

effectiveness of monies spent toward increased

automation of data applications and sharing

These items suggest the reasons for performing a

review and update of this strategic plan, but the two

committees should still meet more frequently to

discuss and review current developments. At the

least, the chair of the technical committee should

report monthly to the steering committee to keep

discussion open and flowing to those members

responsible for budgets, acquisitions, and support.

A number of factors may necessitate more frequent

review and updating than those already mentioned

here. USAF personnel who sit on these committees

are likely to PCS to other assignments, taking

valuable insight with them that must be shared

before leaving. MOD personnel are likely to be a

more stable work force, so key members who sit on

these two committees must be kept informed and

involved. At the very least, changes in the base

mission, comprehensive/general plan, strategic plan,

or related contingency plans may have significant

effects on the GIS/Data Implementation Strategic Plan

that will bring about more frequent review.

Another factor that shouldn�t be ignored as a reason

for review and maintenance of the plan is the change

in technology that will drive new software products.

While Intergraph and Bentley Systems offer new

products and new versions of existing software, their

competitors�such as Autodesk and Environmental

Research Systems Institute (ESRI)�continuously

release new products to the market as well. As new

products are released, the committees at RAFM must

evaluate the current position as it relates to future

goals: Is the structure at any given time taking

advantage of the most appropriate tools on the

market?

A case in point is the upcoming release of ESRI�s

ARC/INFO Version 8, the object-oriented GIS

environment. This product represents an enormous

change in the way that existing ESRI ARC/INFO users

think about their data, let alone the changes it could

bring to the market for other software users, such as

RAFM and the entire USAFE environment. This

product represents breakthrough technology and, if

all goes as ESRI hopes, it should lead to greater

flexibility and opportunities in GIS data

maintenance and sharing.

Other advances are also in the works at Autodesk,

where enhanced features to the company�s

MapGuide web-based viewing tool could include

some form of direct redlining capability and minor

manipulation of data, all within the same software.

These are just two of the potential changes in the GIS

marketplace that are outside the current software

family in use at RAFM but that could have significant

effects on users who are now on other platforms. The

goal of RAFM GIS development is to build within a

COTS atmosphere, while staying ahead of the curve

for data maintenance and use. Issues such as these

are significant and will challenge the GIS

committees for some time to come.

Yet another consideration for updating and

maintaining the GIS/Data Implementation Strategic

Plan involves the overall role of the US Air Force or

related federal agencies. The AF is keenly aware of the

need for Comm and CE to work together toward

providing GIS capabilities at all bases and may well

create specific plans for this data and technology

development.

Another factor is the role of the Tri-Service CADD/

GIS Center at the US Army Corps of Engineers

Waterways Experiment Station in Vicksburg,

Mississippi. Meetings with center staff indicate that

the plans for the next two releases of the TSSDS

include greatly enhanced utility infrastructure

database functions, to possibly include system

maintenance/management requirements, but also

increased focus on true facilities management needs.

These two changes alone could add to the

information RAFM finds necessary to maintain and

share, and therefore must be made a part of any

strategy for data development.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Section 8: Acknowledgements

Table 5. RAF Mildenhall Interview Schedule and Participants

Organization Name Date Time

LAN Shop ✈ MSgt Kevin Fifield 9 June 1998 1315-1430✈ Capt Chad LeMaire

CES Readiness ✈ TSgt Ray Maloney 9 June 1998 1330-1500

CE Computer Shop ✈ Colin Smith 9 June 1998 1500-1600

Communications Squadron ✈ Michael O�Rourke 9 June 1998 1530-1700✈ Steve Perry

Real Property ✈ Howard Rudkin 10 June 1998 1300-1430✈ Sandi Taylor✈ John Griffiths

Wing Plans ✈ LTC Tim Rose 10 June 1998 1500-1630✈ Capt Kitchen✈ Capt Jeff Marsden✈ Capt Gene Moty

Flight Operations ✈ MSgt Clyde Byrd 11 June 1998 0800-0930✈ MSgt Steve Nemecek✈ Capt Susanna Pickle✈ Sgt John King✈ Sgt Poitras

Fuels Supply ✈ TSgt Don Brown 11 June 1998 1000-1130✈ MSgt Darby✈ TSgt Ferrel✈ MSgt David Maher

Security Forces ✈ TSgt Brad Jansen 12 June 1998 0800-0900✈ SSgt Jamien Parks

CE Project Managers ✈ Capt Jim Kossler 12 June 1998 1000-1130✈ Capt Suzanne Fogel✈ 1Lt Dan Guinan

Wing Safety ✈ Ricky McCabe 15 June 1998 0830-0930✈ MSgt Michael Niska✈ SSgt Von M. Bridges

CE Building Management Systems ✈ Gary Syer 15 June 1998 0830-1000✈ John Browne✈ Doug Rush

RAF Mildenhall Sources

Planning is most effective when those most closely

involved in issues take the time to provide thoughtful

insight. The following personnel attended briefings

and interviews and deserve special recognition for

their contributions to this project:

✈ Lt Col Sebastian Romano, 100 CES

✈ Capt Shawn Doyle, 100 CES

✈ MSgt Mark Clinger, 100 CES

✈ Nigel Hutchinson, 100 CES

✈ Tracy Kissler, HQ/AFCEE

Table 5 lists the participants in the interviews:

8-2 SECTION 8

AcknowledgementsR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

Table 5. RAF Mildenhall Interview Schedule and Participants (cont.)

Organization Name Date Time

CE Maintenance/Engineering CADD Shop ✈ Nigel Hutchinson 15 June 1998 1030-1200

CE Assistant Base Civil Engineer (MOD) ✈ Gary Ward 15 June 1998 1300-1430

CE Customer Service ✈ SSgt Brian Castillo 16 June 1998 0800-0930

Lodging Maintenance ✈ Jack Martin 16 June 1998 0900-0930

CE Environmental Flight ✈ Simon Austin 16 June 1998 1000-1130✈ John Dehoe✈ Chris Lacting✈ Dave Nutt

Fire and Rescue ✈ CMSgt Larry Jackson✈ TSgt Dave Lawrence✈ Sgt Baker 16 June 1998 1300-1430

Command Post ✈ Maj David E. Commons 16 June 1998 1500-1630

627th AMSS ✈ Tony Ramirez 22 June 1998 *

*Interviewed by Nigel Hutchinson.

In addition, the personnel listed in Table 6 participated in various briefings:

Table 6. RAF Mildenhall Briefing Participants

Briefing Organization Name Date Time

CE Inbrief ✈ 100CES/CEOH ✈ MSgt Michael Phillips 9 June 1998 1030-1200✈ 100CES/CEOM ✈ TSgt Jason Sheridan✈ 100CES/CEOM ✈ SrA Jason Pearl✈ 100CES/CEOM ✈ Amn Carzell Rice✈ 100CES/CEOM ✈ A1C Ben Crafton✈ 100CES/CEX ✈ TSgt Ray Maloney✈ 100CES/DEO(NSF) ✈ Richard Gray✈ 100CES/CERC ✈ Adrian Coughlan✈ 100CES/CEV ✈ Chris Gluck✈ 100CES/CEV ✈ Dave Nutt✈ 100CES/CERR ✈ Howard Rudkin✈ 100CES/CEF ✈ Chris McAleer✈ 100CES/CEOM ✈ A1C Delina Agustin✈ 100CES/CD ✈ Ian Smith✈ CEOM ✈ Nigel Hutchinson✈ CEOM ✈ Capt Shawn Doyle✈ CC ✈ Lt Col Sebastian Romano

Wing Outbrief 17 June 1998 0900-0930

CE Outbrief 17 June 1998 1100-1200



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Additional Sources

✈ Garnett, Joanne, AICP. �Comprehensive

Planning.� Study Manual for the Comprehensive

AICP Exam of the American Institute of Certified

Planners. Boise, ID: AICP. 1998.

✈ Gillespie, Stephen R. �A Model Approach to

Estimating GIS Benefits.� Unpublished article.

✈ Orsbon, Ben, AICP. �Strategic Planning Process.�

Study Manual for the Comprehensive AICP Exam of

the American Institute of Certified Planners. Boise,

ID: AICP. 1998.

✈ U.S. Air Force Center for Environmental

Excellence. General Plan Guide and Template.

Brooks AFB, TX: US Air Force Comprehensive

Planning, US Air Force Center for

Environmental Excellence. October 1995.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Section 9: Interview Notes

Command Post (100 ARW/CP)

✈ Name. Maj Daniel L. Commons

✈ Extension. 2121

✈ Date and Time. 16 June 1998, 1500-1630

✈ Interview Location. Building 591

✈ Interviewers. Joe Zumwald, Jim Vernon, Scott

McFarlane, Nigel Hutchinson (CE)

Pertinent Responsibilities

The Command Post is responsible for functioning as

the decision-making organization for the 357th

Special Operations Group 100th Battle Staff.

The Command Post reports directly to the wing

commander and is responsible for the following:

✈ Handling emergencies

✈ Ensuring the safety of aircraft operations

✈ Gathering information for briefing the

commander

About 40 people are assigned to major commands,

and there are about 30 people in the Command Post.

Technology and Data: Today

Maj Commons has built an Access database to track

information such as the following:

✈ What is on a hardstand

✈ Fuel levels

✈ Maintenance information

The Command Post shares information with

Lakenheath and channels information to HQ USAFE.

Maj Commons currently has these types of data:

✈ Aircraft status (C2IPS)

✈ Maintenance status

✈ Flying schedules

And he typically uses this kind of data:

✈ Aircraft location

✈ Hanger status

✈ Cordon areas for security alerts

Technology and Data: Future

Data needs relate primarily to facility information,

such as who occupies a facility. But in general, the

Command Post needs the ability to tie together all

issues related to transient aircraft, such as Parking,

Billeting, Maintenance, and Fuel.

The Command Post needs a lot of information from

other groups. The AMC system gives them transient

aircraft information, but currently most information

comes in paper form. Maintenance information

comes from CAM system. They want to collect

information in electronic form, so the GIS is exactly

what he�s been looking for.

Hardware and software needs are minimal. C2IPS is

going client/server. USAFE is giving eight servers to

the Command Post.

Command Post personnel have e-mail, Internet

access, and so on. However, they typically have basic-

level computer skills. For example, the current Access

application uses pulldown menus to make it easy to

use.

9-2 SECTION 9

Interview NotesR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

Wing Plans (100 ARW/XP)

✈ Name. LTC Tim Rose, Capt Kitchen, Capt Jeff

Marsden, Capt Gene Moty

✈ Extension. 5610


✈ Interview Location. Conference Room,

Building 560

✈ Interviewers. Joe Zumwald, Jim Vernon, Nigel

Hutchinson (CE)


Here is an overview of Wing Plans� top

responsibilities:

✈ Manage the deployment �machine��the

mobilization of people and equipment.

✈ Coordinate all operational plans, including

battle staff administration and direction.

✈ Perform site surveys. Wing Plans works with

advance teams that represent other wings

deploying to RAFM to study and prepare for all

human and equipment needs and space

requirements. This would involve how to billet

aircrews and park transient aircraft. From this

study, they must develop a plan for

responsibilities between the two groups.

✈ For readiness and inspection, prepare and

exercise the Wing to accomplish the warfare

assignment. This involves a very busy support-

oriented flying mission. The 100th ARW is the

only assigned tanker unit in USAFE. In fact, it�s

the only one east of the Atlantic Ocean. The

regular mission area covers the entire European

community and into the African continent,

from Norway to South Africa.

LTC Rose, who serves as the Battle Staff Director, gave

the following statement to sum up the interview:

�Wing Plans� charge is to keep the Wing

leadership aware of what�s going on. Anything

from graphics to databases that helps us do that

helps us keep the Commander better informed.�


One of the most important pieces of information

used regularly is a map with coordinates. Wing Plans

needs to know where an incident has occurred, or

where exactly an aircraft is parked. For example, if an

aircraft accident should occur on base, the

responsibility lies with the Air Force.

This mapping is critical both on and off base. If an

accident occurs inside the fence, it�s their

responsibility to be prepared. If an accident occurs off

base, the local constable will be involved and will

look to the Air Force for information and some

support. The responsibility is shared if the accident

site goes over the fence into the local community.

Information that�s especially important on the base

map includes Q/D zones for parked aircraft and hot

gun holding areas, as well as cordons that are

established for unexploded ordnance (UXO) sites.

In terms of hardware and software, no concentrated

effort is under way or planned to establish a specific

level of hardware capacity and software availability.

This group is aware of the Survey Tool for Execution

Planning (STEP) that is being developed at Wright-

Patterson AFB, Ohio (WPAFB).

STEP is a web-based tool using a database (they aren�t

certain what format) to compare and calculate issues

such as fuel availability, billeting, and aircraft

parking spaces at the base for planning purposes

before one or more aircraft arrive.

Air University has incorporated this tool into its

Contingency Wartime Planning Course (CWPC)

curriculum as a future program.


For the future, the Wing Plans representatives want

to be able to create or access the following data:



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

✈ Consolidated Aircraft Maintenance

System (CAMS) data. This program maintains

and analyzes information about aircraft. The

system includes information such as the

aircraft�s status, schedule, mission, crew chief,

and so on, which is logged and maintained to

give users the ability to plan, based on the needs

of the aircraft.

✈ Floor plans. Wing Plans� real need often

involves last-minute planning, so the ability to

locate available space not only for billeting but

for all support activities is critical. Knowing who

is assigned to a specific space and being able to

tie that information to a graphic floor plan

would be very useful.

✈ Operations information. They would like to

have the ability to access and link to all

operations information, such as the Fire

Department�s availability to meet excess aircraft

needs.

✈ Long-range planning. They need

information such as vehicular traffic counts to

keep relatively accurate track of the number of

people on and around RAFM at any given time.

They could do traffic modeling to see how and

where traffic flows in planning for emergency

operations. Counting the number of cars through

the gate at a given time (such as 15- to 30-minute

intervals) might be a good starting point.

Although there are no specific plans to develop

automated tools, Wing Plans sees that their

operations could benefit greatly by a link to much of

the other information that is already being created

and used at RAFM. With the ability to access real- or

almost real-time information, they might be able to

more quickly calculate �the path of least resistance�

in responding to a need.

Wing Plans also computerizes the Base Support Plan,

of which part one is unclassified and part two is

classified for specific wartime plans.

Wing Safety (100 ARW/SE)

✈ Name. Ricky McCabe, MSgt Michael Niska, SSgt

Von M. Bridges

✈ Extension. 4723



✈ Interviewers. Scott McFarlane, Rebecca

Edgerton


Ricky McCabe submitted a copy of the Wing Safety

mission. He highlighted on it the areas that would

especially benefit from a GIS.

The Wing Safety personnel who were interviewed are

mainly concerned with weapons safety and grounds

safety. There are other Wing Safety areas, such as

flight, but they have no GIS-related issues at the

moment.

Wing Safety is also responsible for emergency

response support and investigation of situations

involving explosives. They do explosives site plans,

so they must start with a CE drawing and list

everything in a certain radius and its characteristics,

use, and so on, in relation to safety. They manage

about 30 site plans and about 50 UK exposure

licenses.

In addition, Wing Safety is responsible for the radio

hazard map, which takes a tremendous amount of

information to create. It involves a lot of interaction

with CE, which produces the maps for them.

They give advice over the phone on what people can

and can�t do in relation to explosives, explosive clear

zones, and so on.


Wing Safety doesn�t keep any digital databases. They

do keep spreadsheets with explosives information,

explosives licensing, and explosives site planning,

9-4 SECTION 9

Interview NotesR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

but they don�t know how applicable that would be

for the GIS, because of security concerns.

After discussion, Ricky McCabe and MSgt Niska

agreed it would probably be fine for explosive clear

zones to be available basewide. They�d like all people

who work in and around explosive clear zones to

have access to the same map for viewing purposes.

Wing Safety trains all weapons personnel on base,

using PowerPoint presentations. They�d like to be

able to drop snapshots of zones into their training

materials for use in staff meetings and presentations

to commanders.

Ricky McCabe said they are concerned with areas

outside the base limits only if they have an explosive

zone that extends beyond the base boundary. This

can also apply to materials transportation exposure

on public roads.

All Wing Safety personnel have access to PCs now.

For confined spaces, SSgt Bridges keeps a lot of

information on manholes. Her process of identifying

confined spaces is an actual physical survey to

identify them all. Most of the manholes are done,

but they must go out with sniffers to identify gases

and so on.

CE has a spreadsheet of this data, but SSgt Bridges is

now gathering information to identify the

following:

✈ What the exposure levels are

✈ Who �owns� the facility

✈ Whether the confined space was manufactured

to contain hazards

✈ How much oxygen is available

✈ Whether a permit is required

✈ Whether the fire department must stand by

when the facility is being cleaned

✈ What kinds of clothing personnel must wear for

protection in that facility

SSgt Bridges isn�t yet keeping that information on a

computer; it�s all on paper. But within a year, she

expects to keep it in a database or spreadsheet.

They had a situation a week ago where they

determined that several people had databases of the

qualified motorcyclists on base, so there was a lot of

duplicate effort. Ricky McCabe would like to see that

kind of process coordinated and simplified.

Ricky McCabe asked about eliminating

supplementary databases or software programs. He

would see that as an advantage in certain cases. He�s

especially interested in eliminating duplicate effort.


Producing a site plan report for a small zone typically

takes a couple of days. For a big zone that includes

several sites, it may take a few months. It includes

writing a policy document on what can and can�t be

done. Ricky McCabe said the biggest help from the

GIS would be to create their zones on the maps,

including the accurate distances, so they could click

on supplementary facilities and get land use, facility

manager, and so on. That would eliminate a lot of

telephone calls that they have to make now. And

then being able to keep what they create and print it

as needed.

SSgt Bridges needs a confined space database and a

flammable/combustible database. She needs a map of

confined spaces but doesn�t have it yet because

they�re in the process of being identified now. She

would want to overlay that information on a map

provided by CE.

SSgt Bridges also discussed buildings that get

relocated or condemned. When a building location

changes, she would want to be responsible only for

altering her hazard and exposure information, not

the base map data.

To produce their maps with radius circles for various

zones, they would need an easy-to-use CADD

program for creating the overlays. For Ricky McCabe,

ease-of-use is important so that new people won�t

need months to learn it. They understand that a web



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

tool would just be a viewing and querying

application, not a data creation application.

They need to produce reports that combine

snapshots of particular zones with database

information for site plans for particular facilities.

Wing Safety wants the ability to print and view the

maps they create. They have a color printer but

might need access to a color plotter.

A driving consideration for Wing Safety is

environmental concerns. SSgt Bridges needs to know

Hazmat exposure in a building, how many people are

exposed, what the level of exposure is, and so on. To

some extent, each facility manager is maintaining a

database through Environmental Engineering.

They�d like to be able to click on a building, a tank,

or a hardstand on the map and get information

about its capabilities, capacities, hazards, and so on.

People call Wing Safety to find out what they can

and can�t do in relation to explosive clear zones.

Wing Safety uses their maps, the host nation

regulations, and the American regulations to

determine the answers.

They often need to measure distances and radiuses,

and they understand that the GIS would be very

helpful in that respect. MSgt Niska is also interested

in computing distances between facilities, although

the measurement would be only as accurate as CE�s

base map. They must now use a compass to measure

distances on a paper plot of the map.

MSgt Niska would also like to have the radio hazard

(Radhaz) map on the GIS. They now create that map

by hand-drawing and pasting symbols on a map from

CE, or by coordinating directly with CE to get a

particular map created.

Ground safety needs to list all areas on the base that

have confined spaces. They also want a confined

space database.

Wing Safety shares information with the Fire

Department now just by sending a hard copy of the

exposure license each time it�s issued. So the Fire

Department has just those hard copies. On the US

side, they have exposure site plans. On the UK side,

they have exposures facility licenses, which

authorize particular kinds of exposure by facility,

and a separate �user copy� form that combines the

US and UK requirements and restrictions and

implements the more restrictive regulation in each

case. They are interested in scanning this �user copy�

form to make it available to others on base. Wing

Safety also has an Excel spreadsheet that summarizes,

in order, the facility data, but it�s not complete. Not

everything they track is kept on Excel now. Ricky

McCabe thinks a scanner would be of great use to

them.

They understand that the GIS won�t relieve them of

all their bookwork, but it will help them get more

accurate information faster. Ricky McCabe estimates

that they could incorporate about 30 to 40 percent of

their requirements into a GIS like this.

Fuels Supply (100 LGS)

✈ Name. TSgt Don Brown, MSgt Darby, TSgt

Ferrel, MSgt David Maher

✈ Extension. 2768




Edgerton, Nigel Hutchinson (CE)


Fuels handles all types of fuel for aircraft and

vehicles, as well as heating fuel for base buildings

(including some housing). They get calls in the

winter about heating fuel needs in the building.

9-6 SECTION 9

Interview NotesR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd


For war games, Fuels uses a grid map that is displayed

on the wall with grid coordinates. This map isn�t a

very workable solution for them.

Right now, all fuel tank data is only on paper.

For the automatic tank gauging (ATG) system, they

have a Unix server in the Fuels building. It gauges the

level of the fuel, temperature, specific gravity, and so

on. They are confident about that information. The

interface to it is just a listing screen. In July, they�ll

get software called Fuels Manager, which will have a

graphic interface of the tanks and Oracle. So it�ll be

easier to identify overfills.

They also have a new Fuels Automated System (FAS)

(a Windows NT system with a FoxPro database). It

standardizes much of what they do. Fuels Control used

to do everything on paper, but the FAS standardized

the way Fuels Control works with others.

Other geographic information they deal with

includes fuel lines (pipelines), but they don�t share

that with anyone. CE has CADD data already for

pipelines. CE uses it for digging permits and

planning, but it isn�t handled very effectively.


For construction, Fuels would like to know where

underground utilities (such as electric conduit) are.

Also during exercises, they�d like to run scenarios for

blowing up pipelines. Or if they lose a pipeline, the

GIS could calculate exactly how much pipe of what

type and size was lost.

Fuels gets inquiries about how much fuel has been

charged to an organization. They use a three-digit

organization code to track that data.

Fuels needs to be able to coordinate work orders with

CE, but they understand that that�s a completely

different system.

Ideally, they�d also like to know exactly how much

fuel is in each tank. They�d like to have the GIS

integrated with their ATG system. All that data is

now tracked manually, which is very labor-intensive.

They want to be able to share fuels data as needed

with other organizations, like OPS and AMC.

Fuels needs to receive information on scheduled

aircraft parking for hardstands.

For sharing information with Airfield Operations,

Fuels needs data about scheduled parking, but things

change too quickly, and the paper copies they get

from Airfield Ops are quickly outdated. Each

morning, they need to know the estimated fuel loads

for aircraft that will be parked that day.

Work order coordination with CE is a particular

concern. Fuels must make many phone calls to CE to

check on work order status. Those work orders are for

maintenance and upkeep on fixed fuel facilities.

They also need that kind of information about

vehicles for transportation. A particular problem is

that work orders can get distributed from CE to

various shops, and then the coordination task gets

far more difficult.

Fuels would like to know when emergency

generators are used.

There might also be other information on vehicles,

such as scheduled inspection. A work order network

is in existence already.

Fuels is interested in how the GIS could enhance

training. CAMS is a training database for the Wing

that�s currently in place, although Fuels may stop

using CAMS. They use an Excel spreadsheet and

CAMS to track who has been certified for certain

types of tasks, such as refueling. CAMS has a lot to do

with aircraft maintenance, ordering parts, and more.

It wasn�t originally designed for training, but RAFM

has extended it to include training.

Fuels could use a stock control system to monitor

their use of supplies. They must now call Customer

Service, who calls the next person, who then checks

a supply status. They�d like a way to interface with

SPSS, although they understand that supplies

wouldn�t be GIS-based.

Another idea is a cryogenics facility that includes six



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

fixed tanks; this facility could be monitored for status.

Fuels would like to have all the heating fuel tanks on

base displayed on a map showing which building

each tank belongs to. They�d like to punch up a

building or tank number to get data about what the

tank holds, what kind of fuel it holds, who the

custodian of that tank is, and so on.

The highest-priority applications would be CE work

order coordination; scheduled maintenance

coordination; and cordons for fuel tanks, security

alerts, and so on. They�d like to have CE make

updates about service they�ve provided. If an

operation is waiting for parts or maintenance for a

certain number of days, it should be flagged.

Monitoring fuel levels is critical for them. They�d like

to get rid of AutoFill, a type of contract for heating

fuel tanks that ensures contractors keep the tanks

full. Contractors charge them more for tanks that

have AutoFill contracts. Some of the contractors also

have an automated system to monitor fuel levels in

tanks. The ATG that Fuels have is for jet fuel tanks,

not heating fuel. The ATG helps prevent

environmental impacts from spills.

By monitoring fuels more closely, they have the

potential for saving a tremendous amount of money

per year on fuel costs, even if the savings are only a

few pence per gallon.

Flight Operations (100 OG)

✈ Name. MSgt Clyde Byrd, MSgt Steve Nemecek,

Capt Susanna Pickle, Sgt John King, Sgt Poitras

✈ Extension. 2697




Edgerton, Capt Shawn Doyle (CE), Nigel

Hutchinson (CE)


This interview involved Trans Alert (TA) and Airfield

Management (AM). TA handles transient aircraft

while they are on base. AM manages aircraft parking

on base, munitions storage, aircraft parking pad

maintenance, and so on.

Aircraft parking is distributed as directed in MILDI

13-204 to the flying organization on base. Managing

the distributed responsibility for aircraft parking is

the primary problem for Flight Operations.

Flight Operations is concerned with 3D information,

such as encroachments. They have completed an

airfield operations and waiver-generating program,

which Capt Doyle said he would check on and report

back to the interview team.

Outside of CE, Flight Operations deals with CP,

ATOC, and ATC as well as Lakenheath ATC, SFS, and

TA. They also must do traffic reports and history

reports for all activity, including the type of aircraft,

whether US or foreign, and more.

AM is responsible for the management of the airfield

program, such as the storage of fuels, storage of

munitions, and unexploded ordnance, although

Capability Forecasting at AMSS is primarily

responsible for coordinating these functions with

the primary users. If an evacuation is necessary, AM

is notified by Capability Forecasting; AM then

coordinates the evacuation. For that responsibility,

they need a considerable amount of data for

hardstands, including the pavement classification

numbers, licensing requirements, capabilities, net

explosive weight, quantitative distance (maximum

radius), and so on.

MOC is the Maintenance Operations Center. AM

does not work frequently with MOC. However, they

call the individuals they need directly, like SOG.

That alleviates confusion that could result from

relaying the information once to MOC and having

MOC relay the information to the individuals

involved.

9-8 SECTION 9

Interview NotesR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd


TA has an airfield map in AutoCAD from CE, and

they have used AutoCAD to add aircraft symbols.

They use that map only during the Air Fête. The rest

of the time, they use a white board to list parking

stands. They have about 65 parking stands.

The information AM creates is maintained just on

paper. AM has no computers for that type of work,

but they do use computers for regular office tasks.

AM is also responsible for runway profiles. For that,

they need to know the levelness of hardstands for

jacking capabilities and the physical location of each

hardstand in relation to obstacles. They are also

concerned with licensing hardstands for hazardous

cargo.

CE maintains and provides maps to AM containing

GPS coordinates or INS coordinates for hardstands as

well as slope and gradient of runways.

In case of any contingencies, they must make a lot of

phone calls, which is very time-consuming.

For coordination with other agencies (such as Fuel),

they use the LAN, but it would be easier if everyone

shared a system.

The PPR system is all hard copy, but it�s in the process

of being computerized internally as an Access

database. Now the hardcopy PPR data is organized by

months in a three-ring binder. For each day, a form

lists available parking spots, and the form is filled in

by hand. The binder, which is accessible only by TA,

isn�t very effective for planning and tracking aircraft

parking.

Another problem for the tower is the fact that eight

organizations are involved in aircraft parking and

scheduling.


When construction must be done, MSgt Byrd must

coordinate with the primary user about potential

blockages and hardstand closings. He now uses the

LAN to send messages, but he still can�t consult any

authoritative record to see when an area will be free.

It would also be ideal for the graphics to designate

various areas for certain organizations, like a certain

set of hardstands for TA.

MSgt Byrd would also like to be able to do

contingency planning for use of the available

pavement in wartime planning. That would be a

classified application. Capt Doyle mentioned using a

product like Schedule Plus for this process.

Because every aircraft requires fuel, fleet service, and

transportation (separate agencies), they�d like to

have a more automated way to communicate and

coordinate with those agencies, such as an

automated e-mail. It would be far more effective for

projecting the seven-day window, instead of the

reactionary system they have now.

Their window for scheduling is seven days out.

Currently, no base has a unified system for this kind of

operation. In addition, RAFM also handles certain

types of aircraft traffic that can be scheduled months

in advance. Generally, though, they make

reservations only within seven days. If this

information were available for other bases in addition

to RAFM, that would be ideal for handling overflow.

If they want to use a crane, the data must go to the

Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) person,

who ensures that the crane can operate in that area

without infringing on airspace. They could really use

3D capabilities to plan and monitor airspace

regulation. They have a color-coded paper map for

airspace infringements, and the data may already be

in a database in CE. They must update that paper

map regularly through CE. They need maximum

height requirement data delineated by area for

planning purposes. This requirement extends off the

boundary of the base, within a 5-mile radius of the

airfield. The TERPS staff member just did an obstacle

map within 50 miles of the airfield, and he had to do

that by hand using Ordinance Survey maps and a

database that lists obstacles. That effort took two and

a half months.

For Flight Operations, the ultimate system would

indicate where they planned to put an aircraft,



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

effectively �reserving� a hardstand even before it�s

actually in use. They could also benefit from

knowing when an aircraft is scheduled to leave, so

they�d know when a hardstand would be available

again.

Also, if they had a graphic representation of how the

airfield is being used at any time, they could more

effectively handle overflow from transient aircraft or

AMC aircraft. They�d know which hardstands were

available in case they needed to swap aircraft from

location to location. They must now make phone

calls to do that.

They�d like the graphic representation to color-code

a radius ring around a parked aircraft that�s �hot,�

which can potentially limit the use of hardstands

around it. They must now move aircraft around

when that happens.

In addition, Flight Operations could benefit from

transportation data for flight crews, because they

must now use the radio a lot for that. They also need

the tail number, fuel requests, maintenance, and so

on. And they�d like to track maintenance

discrepancies. Ideally this information would be

entered into the system from the field, to reduce

excessive radio calls and coordination.

Most of their information requests are from three

sources:

✈ Fuels calls to ask where fuel for a certain tail

number is to go.

✈ Transient and Maintenance call to find out

where certain aircraft are.

✈ The control tower needs information about

aircraft parking locations. This base has parking

locations distributed between eight

organizations, each of which controls its own

locations. But the tower doesn�t typically get the

word on where aircraft is supposed to be parked,

so they don�t know where aircraft are supposed to

park, without making numerous phone calls or

asking the aircraft commander. Flight Operations

would like to have the eight organizations input

data on where aircraft are supposed to be parked

so the tower would know. They typically use call

signs rather than tail numbers.

CE Readiness (100 CES)

✈ Name. TSgt Ray Maloney

✈ Extension. 4249


✈ Interview Location. Classroom, Building 538

✈ Interviewers. Joe Zumwald, Jim Vernon


Readiness is responsible for emergency and disaster

response activities to ensure that command/control

capabilities are in place at the scene. This group must

be able to brief the Wing Commander on site with

up-to-date information about the situation at hand.

In action during an emergency, Readiness works

more like a Wing staff agency than a division of CE.

Here is an overview of TSgt Maloney�s top

responsibilities:

✈ Participating in the Disaster Control Group

(DCG) and the Survival Recovery Center (SRC)

for major accidents or natural damage to the

airfield and related facilities

✈ Providing immediate briefing capability to keep

the Wing Commander and on-scene

commander informed for effective management

of the emergency situation

✈ Training Disaster Control Group members

✈ Identifying personnel in a cordon area due to an

emergency situation

✈ Notifying local residents affected by an

emergency situation

✈ Compiling the on-scene commander�s checklist,

using AFIs and UK specifications

9-10 SECTION 9

Interview NotesR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd


Most information that Readiness deals with is

maintained in CE, either as part of the Drafting Shop

or in the Fire Station. Readiness accesses both the

Map C-1 data and the local regional mapping

information as available in the Fire Station�s

Emergency Information System (EIS).

Plume (airborne dispersal of toxic materials) modeling

is an important response issue. Information is used to

support both RAFM as it relates to the local

community and the geographically separated units

(GSUs) attached to RAFM. The goal is to give the on-

scene commander/base commander all available

information needed to make fast, effective decisions

on containing an emergency.

Readiness pulls information from all members of the

support group, creating the Disaster Preparedness O-

Plan and CE Contingency Response Plan. CRP has a

list of priority facilities, which they now have to

double-check to make sure it�s correct for planning

response. Readiness prepares the response checklists

regularly, but much of the basewide information is

12 months out-of-date, although they spot-check

information at least quarterly. TSgt Maloney believes

that exercises rarely reveal where information is

missing; only the real thing brings out the problems.

Readiness is currently using Map C-1 in hardcopy

formats, with special emphasis on the Q/D safety

zones that Drafting has digitized. They have a copy

of ESRI ArcExplorer, but can�t get to the Map C-1 in

MicroStation at CE. They also use information from

the Fire Station�s EIS, with ALOHA and CAMEO

plume modeling, but they don�t have these software

environments locally.

By the nature of the Readiness role, they generate no

information of their own but use as much of others�

information as is available.

Current technology support in Readiness includes

the following:

✈ IMMARSAT Satellite Communication, voice, fax,

data (2 KB/s)

✈ Four laptops for field use: three Pentium 266s

with a 5-GB hard drive, digital modems, and

LAN cards; two cell phone with data cards and

cables for modems in laptops; and one Pentium

133 that isn�t cell phone compatible

✈ Control Area has one Pentium 200 with 32 MB

of RAM and a 2-GB hard drive and links to

laptops via modem

✈ Two screen projectors

✈ All flight members use the Internet heavily


For the future, TSgt Maloney expressed the following

needs and goals:

✈ Software. He is familiar with ESRI ArcView, is

knowledgeable about the mapping information

that has been developed in the UK, and would

like to see this environment build as an essential

tool for Readiness and support.

ArcView and CAMEO plume modeling software

packages have now been purchased.

✈ Base Mapping Data. He would like to have all

structures available with their floor plans

attached as vector data. The most helpful data to

be attached would be as follows:

✯ The facility manager�s name

✯ A list of units occupying the space with

points of contact (POCs)

✯ The normal occupant load during regular

business hours

✯ A list of occupants with special needs

Within the base mapping, critical facilities and

structures need to be shown differently. Facilities

with Hazmat and POL storage need attached lists of

the type and quantity of materials. Other facilities�

such as schools, child care centers, medical, housing

and dining facilities�must also be easily located on

the mapping.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Readiness also needs a raster image of aerial

photography for the base and into the surrounding

area for at least a 10-mile radius.

Readiness also needs access to real-time information on

the field, such as parking spots, hardstands, and so on.

Finally, Readiness needs a base map, attached databases,

and aerial photography as necessary for GSUs.

✈ EIS Information. Readiness would like to have

similar capabilities to the Fire Station�s EIS and

be able to share information about immediate

response.

✈ Information Goals. TSgt Maloney really needs

access to critical information in checklists, special

maps, and action plans at a moment�s notice.

Readiness is the one organization that needs as

much mapping and related information about the

local community as it does about the base.

CE Real Property (100 CES)

✈ Name. Howard Rudkin, Sandi Taylor, John

Griffiths

✈ Extension. 5637


✈ Interview Location. Work Room, Building 443


Edgerton


Real Property�s responsibility is to function as the

accurate recordkeeper of basic asset facilities and to

provide assistance to commanders in making long-

term decisions for maximizing the base facilities. The

base has 2,000,000 square feet.

The Air Force tasks Real Property with performing an

inventory every three years, but Real Property does it

every 18 months. They plan to use GPS for the

inventory. During that process, they assign missing

facility numbers as needed.


Real Property has internally developed some

sophisticated Access database applications. They are

confident about the data in that database and in

WIMS. They know of only a few exceptions where

the database is inaccurate.

One of the applications is an automated space

allocation system using category codes in Access 97.

Howard will provide the interview team with a copy

of this data on CD. The application is on the Intranet

for commanders to view it. With that application,

commanders can determine whether a certain

facility use is appropriate. The goal for that

application was to connect to the floor plan

drawings, but that hasn�t happened yet. But with the

Access application, Real Property can track moves

that happen within the base.

In the Real Property database, the smallest unit of

data is square footage by user or use, which is called

gross square footage. At building level, they use a net-

to-gross ratio. They have old information about who

is in each room, but it hasn�t been kept up-to-date.

The Nakata database did that, but it was just a

snapshot in time.

Real Property has completed a project to scan all

their documentation since 1953. They now have

those images on CDs, which are organized by

vouchers and by years. Basically, they took 25 five-

drawer filing cabinets and put them onto 16 CDs that

contain raster images. The database they use is called

FileFlow. The scanned data is relevant only to Real

Property, not for wider use. They have a scanner to

continue scanning vouchers and a CD writer to

create new CDs as needed.

Real Property doesn�t think it would be hard to

maintain data on user/occupant by room. They

typically would have only 20 or 30 moves to track per

year. But it would be a lot of effort to update the

Nakata data, which is now five years old. The floor

plan drawings also haven�t been updated.

Real Property uses floor plan drawings that are

maintained in CADD by Nigel Hutchinson�s group. If

a floor plan needs to be changed, Real Property

9-12 SECTION 9

Interview NotesR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

notifies CEOM. CEOM also gets the as-builts from

the contractors. The floor plans don�t show room

numbers, but CEOM assigns room numbers to the

CADD drawings. During the Nakata survey, they

arbitrarily allocated room numbers to any building

that was missing them. But few have systematic or

logical room numbers.

Real Property used to have a building management

program, but COPS (Customer Service) has that now.

The office uses all of the WIMS 7115 data, including

facility user, category code, areas, construction year,

and so on. Real Property creates that information for

WIMS for RAFM for new facilities. With that

information, Real Property can keep records of assets.

For four staff members, Real Property has five PCs

that are all Pentium 166 or above, with Windows 95

and Office 97, and IWIMS access. They�re

comfortable with the hardware they have now and

believe they get good support from the Computer

Shop for their hardware. Everyone in Real Property

has Internet access, but they don�t all use it or know

how to use it.


The squadron commanders get information from

Real Property, as do the various tenant units.

For the inventory Real Property performs, they

believe that the data should be on WIMS, but it isn�t

now. They�d like to have handheld PCs connected to

the database. This information would be useful

basewide. And they�d like the surveying staff to be

involved in making on-site sketches; it�s especially

important to get the base boundary done correctly.

And if this information were available basewide, the

surveying staff could verify it as needed after it was

entered in WIMS.

Real Property needs an application to determine

whether the x people in one location will be able to

move into a certain building or space. That would

save a lot of moving expenses. It would also help in

convincing people that it will be possible for them to

move into a certain space, so it would save time.

Real Property would like to be able to query a

building for information. Using a digital map, they�d

like to identify a certain facility and be able to find

out which of their CDs contains that scanned

information. That would allow them to summarize

expenses for a certain time period, using the scanned

images. Even though it would mean looking at the

scanned images, it would be faster than looking in

file cabinets.

Overall, they need the ability to give facts to the

commanders who must make decisions about space

allocation. They also want to be able to run scenarios

to determine the impact of a prospective move.

Howard Rudkin mentioned that the Nakata codes

aren�t particularly useful; he prefers not to use the

Manning codes, so he substituted his own values for

the Manning codes in his Access application.

The Nakata survey was very accurate, but it doesn�t

include housing or commercial. It also didn�t include

�horizontal� assets, like runways, hardstands, and so

on. Underground utilities are also not included in

Nakata. Real Property needs data on the

underground utilities�the �nonoccupiable�

facilities. That would be essential in planning

maintenance for roads, underground wiring, and so

on. Today, they must just judge how much to plan

for each maintenance project, because they have no

actual way to determine it.

When Real Property removes a demolished building

from the records, that information is gone from

WIMS, but they can go back to their historic CD

records. However, they�d like to have the information

from WIMS transferred somewhere as a historic

record instead of just deleting it. Now, they have to

run a voucher-by-voucher check, which is very time-

consuming.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

CE Project Managers (100 CES)

✈ Name. Capt Jim Kossler, Capt Suzanne Fogel,

1Lt Dan Guinan

✈ Extension. 5656


✈ Interview Location. Work Room, Building 443




Capt Kossler is the Chief of Engineering. Capt Fogel

is the base planner, with responsibility for overseeing

design, including new buildings. She is responsible

for the base comprehensive plan. Capt Kossler will

provide an organization chart.

Engineering is responsible for new construction and

renovation, including all design, long-range

planning, project programming, and construction,

for anything between about $US 50,000 and $US 10

or $US 15 million.

Maintenance Engineering reviews all projects for

long-term maintainability, but Engineering has the

final say.

Real Property handles the moves needed between

buildings, but Engineering must coordinate that

with them. The movement and staging plan is

Engineering�s responsibility to update.

Engineering also does the refurbishment contracts.

They use WIMS to track work orders, but not

recurring maintenance (CE Operations handles

that).

Engineering�s EA does all future plans and building

siting through a computer that�s linked to the

Maintenance Engineering computers. So they have

access to the base maps.


Engineering has a lot of CADD drawings. As each

project finishes, they have new drawings in

MicroStation.

In addition to the FUS, Engineering has other

information that would need to get tied into a GIS,

such as facility design standards (which now exist as

a Word document).

Within WIMS, they use a project contract

management system (PCMS). Any database they use

must coordinate with that. They use the PCMS

actively, and they create weekly reports from it. But

the PCMS is somewhat limited. They�d like the

Wang-based system to talk to Access or Oracle so

they could manipulate it more freely. They know

that the Air Force is doing that already, with the

intention to go to a full Oracle database.

In general, the Engineering project managers have

no digital graphic data.

They also use Microsoft Project, and they have a lot

of information on Excel, but they haven�t yet

converted to Access; they�re waiting to see which

database WIMS will use.

Environmental is getting new software for tracking

asbestos, lead-based paint, oil/waste separators, and

so on.

The commander�s facility assessment has been

abandoned. Instead, they now have an FIM (facility

investment metric), which divides all facilities into

several categories:

✈ Primary mission

✈ Mission support

✈ Community support

Having that information online would be much

easier for them. They need to produce text-based

reports on those categories and other types of

category codes.

They have an Access database from the housing

community plan that they would want to link to a GIS.

9-14 SECTION 9

Interview NotesR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

But that data is �locked,� and they can�t make any

changes. So they don�t use it as much as they would.

The Airfield Waiver Package is used by Engineering

and coordinated with Wing Safety, TERPS (the

Tower), Base Operations, and CE. Whenever an

object is installed that violates airfield criteria, they

must coordinate with the four groups. They have a

computerized AF Form 582 that goes on a digitized

map.

The base map was built on the UK ordnance survey

(OS) mapping system. But as technology has moved

along, they�ve used GPS for later maps.

With the PCMS, they have no problems with access

or security, because Engineering controls it. Both

Capt Kossler and Capt Fogel use PCMS quite

extensively, but it can be quite a challenge to use.

They have a digital photo library of a part of the base.

Maintenance Engineering also has some photos.

The project managers have adequate access to

computers. They all have Internet access. However,

they mentioned ongoing network problems, with

access rights changing for no apparent reason.

For the surrounding community, they sometimes

hold future construction plan status briefings, using

PowerPoint, scanned paper maps, and maps from

MicroStation. Some of the �scanned� material is

�photographed� paper drawings that are then

converted to a file.

As data comes in from contractors, Engineering must

ensure that the data is complete and compatible.

Engineering�s drafting staff uses MicroStation, but

contractors use AutoCAD. They do have standards for

CADD submissions, as part of the Facility Design

Standards document.


Capt Kossler thinks MicroStation should be

accessible to anyone in Engineering Flight, so they�d

need more memory and more site licenses.

Public Affairs could use access to ongoing

construction information through the Intranet, for

publication in the Marauder, the base newspaper. It

could be part of the external or internal Mildenhall

web site.

For hardware, Engineering needs a color printer and

access to a faster plotter. They don�t have access to

the Intergraph system. They need a backup system

with a tape drive. Five of the people need larger

screens.

They need access to the real property database

developed by Howard Rudkin. Engineering would

use it, especially if it were for more than just space

utilization. The FUS is based on net square footage

rather than gross square footage, and they need

gross.

Capt Kossler has seen WPAFB, which has a CD-ROM

jukebox for architects and engineers to access maps.

He�d like Engineering to have that capability, with

maps at any size, CADD drawings at any size, and

plotting capabilities. He wants utility drawings.

1Lt Guinan mentioned that access to some

information would have to be restricted.

Engineering would like to digitize aerial photography,

especially for driveways and parking lots. The existing

aerial photography hasn�t been rectified.

The existing base maps are considered �skewed,� and

addressing that discrepancy is the most important

thing for Engineering. They also must be

georeferenced.

Engineering is concerned about how much training

the new GIS would require. Training was a big issue

with the Wang system.

Engineering sees relatively little value in any kind of

automated digging permit system, because collecting

the data would be labor intensive.

One challenge for Engineering in the UK is how

information is organized. In the US, WIMS

information is organized by work order number.

Here, it�s organized by project number, so they can

lose track between project and work order numbers.

It�s a problem in tracking, for example in housing,



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

where they may spend only $US 15,000 per year

maintaining each unit. But their project numbers

aren�t tied to work orders, so it�s difficult to

coordinate between what Operations spends and

what Maintenance spends. Engineering does some

housing management, although the day-to-day

maintenance is done by CE Operations. But

Engineering has some responsibility for projects in

housing. Of course, RAFM has only about 117 houses;

Lakenheath has about 1,200 houses.

For future projects, Engineering has no way to

determine whether they will stay within the $US

15,000 spending limit per structure, and they need to

track both current and future year projects. The

expenses can be tracked to some extent, but it�s time-

consuming, and they can track only after something

is billed, not while it�s planned.

Other groups request information from Engineering,

including future plans (which Engineering

computerizes and plots) and Gantt charts on project

status. Engineering doesn�t require digital submittals

from contractors until the project is built. They

would be fine with having future plans on an

Intranet.

Engineering should have the ability to add and alter

fields in any data they own within a database they use.

Engineering would like all of the general plan

(executive summary) components to be digitized,

hyperlinked, and accessible to them. It would be far

easier for them to then submit it to USAFE.

The base planner could use access to the base map,

the community plan, and the FUS for identifying

developable areas.

As for other people accessing what Engineering creates,

they have no problem as long as the data is read-only.

But they do want control of who can see what.

Engineering would have no problem with digitizing

the text of the comprehensive plan into a shareable

form.

For new building siting, Engineering could use access

to utility information. They do that now by looking

at paper-based utility maps. An environmental layer

would also be useful. Having Gary Syer�s electrical

and utility information would be beneficial.

CE Building Management Systems(100 CES)

✈ Name. Gary Syer, Electrical; John Browne,

Mechanical and Plumbing; Doug Rush, Pavements

✈ Extension. 5684


✈ Interview Location. Maintenance

Engineering, Building 443


Hutchinson (CE)


Here is an overview of this organization�s top

responsibilities:

✈ Building Management System (BMS)

programming

✯ Ensure that the BMS develops to target

programs and works to meet specifications.

✯ Implement the BMS as CE would like to

have it work, including setting up and

initiating programs (such as system

integration with fire alarms).

✈ Facility Inspection Database (FID)

administration, management, and operation

✯ Administer/manage the rating systems on

various components to help determine

facility spending for project programming.

✯ Manage this database, which has been

accepted by MOD as the format for sharing

this info. The FID meets the Infrastructure

9-16 SECTION 9

Interview NotesR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

Condition Standard; all rating by Air Force

Standards has been accepted by AFCESA (see

the AFMC Infrastructure Conditions

Standards).

The role of Building Management is to provide

services necessary to monitor and maintain the

mechanical, electrical, and physical facilities at

RAFM, including airfield pavements and real

property assets.

Nigel Hutchinson discussed CEOM�s basic

responsibilities, including coordination with project

managers. Gary Syer focuses on electrical utilities, so

he knows the substations and he checks electric bills.

John Browne does plumbing and mechanical.

Andrew �Doug� Rush handles construction (B&CE),

including pavement and painting. Gary Syer is

extremely busy and has an extensive database that is

linked, but it needs modification. CEOM has a

software system called BMS that Gary Syer is very

proud of. Nigel Hutchinson has had nothing to do

with BMS, and he�s hoping not to take it on if Gary

Syer leaves. Gary Syer wanted him to administer the

server, but he hasn�t done that. A contractor

maintains BMS.


SQL*Server-based software from Andover

Controls Infinity is a software package that both

Lakenheath and RAFM use.

While all facilities are planned to be part of this

system, the system now concerns only the boiler

houses and heat facilities. All information is real

time, through the placement of sensors in each

building. This is an object-oriented database, and

all systems have their own attributes.

✈ Performance considerations

✯ The graphics schema drove the parameters

for the data.

✯ The system contains lots of building

information (such as temperature, air

controls, general HVAC).

✯ This system tracks the efficiency of the

building environmental systems.

✯ It also tracks information about fuels.

✯ Users can adjust the system by using

toolbars on the graphic user interface (GUI).

For example, authorized staff can change

the operational settings of the HVAC for a

specific building, such as managing the

temperature of an office across the base.

✯ The user can start with a facility/building

number or map graphics to log in and

review data. A potential user scenario might

include the following:

� Choose a building from the base map.

The program displays a map of the

building for each of its separate systems.

� Review the overall characteristics of the

climate in the building and isolate one

system (hot water heat, for example) to

see if its settings are correct or if it�s

operating properly.

� Use the system to monitors fire alarms.

One component of this system is a fire

alarm management module. Alarms are

tied into the system to give the BMS

manager information when they go off.

This alarm module is also tied into the

Fire Department to show graphically

where the alarm is sounding. At this

time, the alarms are only in use on the

same facilities that are linked to the

BMS, but eventually this program will

go basewide for all facilities.

✈ Andover will be upgrading to the Continuum.

✈ They are able to import graphics, such as CADD

drawing files or digital photo images.

✈ The next release of the BMS is scheduled to be

Windows 98 compatible.

✈ BMS is NT Server-based, and it�s due to be

available in 1999.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

✈ Right now, the base map is a raster bitmap. They

have to keep it up-to-date and bring in new

raster images when changes occur.

✈ The system is automatic. Duplication as a

backup is on a smaller network.

✈ There are few bases in the U.S. on Andover

multiple systems.

✈ Requirements of the Andover BMS include the

following:

✯ A fiberoptic network

✯ An open system

✯ Ability to convert to almost any platinum

sensors and change to meet each

specification (for example, the different

performance values of things like valves,

pressure relief valves, alarms, and so on)

✯ Accepts user input so that valves and current

controls are set within the BMS to the type

needed

✈ BMS has digital photos of all features (control

panels, fuse boxes, and so on) for reference. Users

can then look at feature controls from a remote

location via digital images. BMS started with

major energy consumers to meet regulations for

energy savings.

✈ The Andover Infinity BMS was brought online in

September 1997, with the fire systems portion

online in February 1998. This database helps

build the five-year plan to program projects at

RAFM. A summary five-year plan can look at all

facilities, each one individually, or use a rating.

It can look at the history of maintenance and

program planning, up to the point of

construction.

✈ The second database that John Browne uses is for

referencing pressure vessels in the heating

system. This database is in MS Access 95 or 97. He

built all screens and windows. All buildings will

have infrastructure report histories and PCMS in

WIMS.

Development of this program came about as a high-

level directive item from the 3rd AF and UK.

Data comes from a dump of WIMS information for a

facility for all worksheets, which provides the

historical data. The history goes from inspection to

construction. The inspection list includes some

information from real property from WIMS,

although the database contains more specific

information than WIMS does.

Gary Syer tried to start the database development in

Oracle, but problems kept creeping up that drove

him back to MS Access.


The future of the BMS is expected to include the

following:

✈ Electric substation controllers will help monitor

power usage and induce brownouts where

possible to prevent exceeding the half-hour level

as measured by the electric provider. Brownouts

on this plan haven�t happened yet, but they may

still be the future. This will include setting up a

load-shed program for energy management.

✈ BMS can now be accessed via the Internet.

Anyone with a browser could look at it, just the

same as it was displayed during the interview.

With this scenario, for example, the CE at

Ramstein AB would have read-only rights but

could more easily do reporting. The product to

use for this function is Infinity Webserver

(Andover Controls).

✈ The electrical database is in an MS Excel

workbook. This includes all the high-voltage

rings on the base, with an associated table for

each ring. Cable sizes and open rings are also

included in the database. This database helps

monitor where capacity exists, where an open

ring may cause an overload and similar related

system information. All substations are listed

with federal facilities such as the KVA rating,

9-18 SECTION 9

Interview NotesR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

locations and types of switches and fuses, and

legs of cable tied to facilities. This is a great

conceptual application for GIS, but all

information must be there and be 100 percent

correct.

Both UK and US laws for electrical systems require

showing inspections and schedules for inspection

annually. This is currently done by the Defense Estates

Organization (DEO), which is the monitoring agency

to review specifications to both UK and US part of

MOD at this point. The DEO will do many of the

inspections, with Gary Syer validating the results.

CE Maintenance Engineering/CADDShop (100 CES)

✈ Name. Nigel Hutchinson

✈ Extension. 5649


✈ Interview Location. Work Room, Building

644


McFarlane, Rebecca Edgerton


Here is an overview of Nigel Hutchinson�s top

responsibilities:

✈ System administration of the NT server, which is

accessed by the drafters, engineers, captain, and

sergeant, one EA in Base Development, and

various users of the electronic Asbestos Register

from RAF Mildenhall and GSUs

✈ Training Maintenance Engineering users on

various topics, including OS, MicroStation,

aspects of GIS, and Microsoft Office

✈ Oracle administration, including a GIS database,

and seven or eight separate databases for asbestos

information

✈ GIS administration and coordination for CE


Most information that CE deals with is maintained

in CE. However, they also act as the data repository

for the asbestos registers from different bases around

England.

Base maps for RAFM are done within CE. Nigel

Hutchinson is more allied to drafters than to CE

engineers. They map many features used by others at

RAFM, including future use projects. The future use

map is maintained by the EA in Base Development

(but not the drafters in Nigel Hutchinson�s office)

and is plotted in Nigel Hutchinson�s office.

CEOM drafters produce a base map identifying

immediate and near-term projects that have a direct

impact on the mission at RAF Mildenhall. This

document is used in particular by the Base and Deputy

Civil Engineers and Airfield Management. This is used

as a tool to provide uniformity in all briefings.

For NATO-funded projects, CEOM drafters produce

color-coded base maps, depicting the NATO program

over a two-year cycle. These documents are used by

senior CE staff to brief the Wing leadership. For

explosives, safety, utilities, floor plans, and policy,

they also produce a wide variety of special use maps.

They sometimes get updated floor plans but

sometimes not.

For maps that are used in the field for maintenance,

CE typically only gets updates from as-built drawings

after a project is finished. They have the base map

from the flyover. Until the last effort, the utility

maps have been mostly hard copies with less detailed

digitized drawings for some of the utilities. The hard

copies were drawn at a scale of 1:500 using British

symbology. For the last six months, CEOM has

brought all existing digitized maps up to the Tri-

Service Spatial Data Standard (TSSDS).

When that was done (December 1997), CE started

inputting 1:500 scale utility maps into new and

existing digitized utility maps. Until now, people

have used copies of the 1:500 maps for maintenance,

but they have given little or no feedback for updates.

A few months ago, CEOM had the shops review the



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

1:500 maps for accuracy. The shops said they either

had no time to review them or had no better source,

so CE basically got no updates. But that

communication didn�t go back up through the chain

of command, so Nigel Hutchinson thinks the

commanders over the shops may make it happen.

Contractors use copies of the maps for laying pipe,

constructing buildings, and so on. When contractors

get hard copies, CE asks them to survey and verify

anything shown. But Nigel Hutchinson doesn�t

know if those surveys are actually performed,

because his office gets little or no change

information back.

This situation creates a challenge for digging permits.

And even when digging disrupts utility service, CE

still gets no information for updating existing maps.

Nigel Hutchinson doesn�t know how often digging

operations disrupt buried utilities. He said he would

find that out. Nigel Hutchinson estimates that it�s

happened two or three times.

CE is using MGE version 7, including Basic Nucleus,

Base Mapper, Grid Finisher, IRAS-C and I-PLOT (both

of which they have but don�t use), and Project

Architect, as well as an older version of VistaMap. CE

also has Oracle 7.3.2, NT 4.0 Server, one license of NT

for Workstation, and eight 3.5.1 workstations. They

also have ArcView 3.0 Alpha and ArcExplorer version

1. In addition, CE has Access 95/97 and MicroStation

version 5, which is to upgrade to 95 within two

weeks.

Here is information about the existing and planned

data structure for the GIS:

✈ The version 1.4 database structure for facilities

information is from the old WIMS (about a year

old) and is linked to the buildings map.

✈ The asbestos database isn�t in TSSDS. Just one of its

tables has a couple of columns populated to

TSSDS.

✈ Nigel Hutchinson imports the asbestos database

but doesn�t have it working with the most up-to-

date map yet. It�s an ongoing project. Nigel

Hutchinson�s task is to link the RAFM asbestos

data to the base map, all in TSSDS. He must go

through it annually to ensure compliance with

TSSDS. It�s been a challenge.

✈ The base maps created by CE will be updated

annually, in accordance with annual submittals

to USAFE.

✈ When utilities are finished, they will add

utilities into the floor plans. The utilities are

currently just on a basewide utility drawing. CE

needs a standard for adding the utilities to floor

plans. Ramstein told Nigel Hutchinson that if

the shop defines a standard that�s considered

acceptable, it may get implemented as the

USAFE-preferred standard for services in floor

plans. As of six months ago, the rest of USAFE was

not as far along as RAFM in implementing TSSDS.

✈ CE has some floor plans in paper format that

haven�t yet been digitized. Nakata did floor plans

basewide. They don�t cover commercial services

or base housing, but they cover just about

everything else. Nigel Hutchinson uses them

often.

✈ CE also has many Mylars in the vault that they

reproduce with a large photocopier. CE receives

332 forms, the drafters review them, and they

update the base map with what�s on the as-builts

after the 332s are complete. So CE files and stores

the submitted as-builts, and the CE engineers

store maintenance data. Otherwise, they don�t

hold anything on paper that CE generates. As-

builts are in both paper and digital form. CE

typically waits about three to five days for the

engineers to check and approve the as-builts.

✈ CEOM has information from CEV about catch

basin locations. CEV has an Excel spreadsheet or

Access table of this data. The data didn�t fit on

the CE maps, because some of it is storm. So this

data was created as a separate layer. Nigel

Hutchinson dumped the CEV Access file into

Oracle and gave it back to CEV with a shape file

for use with ArcView. He doesn�t know if it�s

being used.

9-20 SECTION 9

Interview NotesR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

The drafters are responsible only for maintaining

digital data. They don�t use it or analyze it in any

way. It�s a challenge for the drafters to learn

everything they need to know about GIS,

MicroStation, and TSSDS.

Other users of CE data include SFS, CS, CE project

managers, CE engineers, DEO staff, Airfield

Operations, and CE utility shops. Those users

typically come in and fill out an in-house form for

what they want, and a drafter who functions as

Customer Service for that week handles the request.

CE also produces plots for the commander and

deputy BCE, especially for meeting presentations.

CE also owns two digital cameras that users sign out;

Nigel Hutchinson�s office prints out the files. Those

cameras are generally used for documenting the

situation when progress on a contract is in question.

CE�s most pressing need is to get updates from users

so they can keep the base map up to date. The only

source of change data now is the 332s.


For the future, Nigel Hutchinson wants to be able to

create or access the following data:

✈ Utility Information. Nigel Hutchinson has

looked at some of the data in the existing tables,

including pipe length, buried depth, cathodic

protection, and more. He thinks that

information would be useful to the engineers

and the shops.

✈ Facilities Management Data. This data

would also be beneficial.

✈ Roads. Road data would be helpful.

✈ A Five-Year Paint Program. Data from that

program would be useful.

✈ Inspections. This information would come

from a database that Gary Syer uses.

Nigel Hutchinson�s group would benefit from this

information:

✈ Any information that would help them verify

how accurate the base map is

✈ Future projects (construction phases)

✈ BCP phases

✈ Asbestos data (phase two is going to start soon).

Nigel Hutchinson doesn�t know what data that

will include. The contract has been awarded

already. Nigel Hutchinson can talk to that

contractor and give them the data structure he�s

been using.

Nigel Hutchinson mentioned these needs and goals:

✈ Hardware. In CEOM, all workstations are

Intergraph hardware with NT. All have 64 MB of

RAM except the server, which has 128 MB of

RAM. Four workstations have two 2-GB drives.

The server has four 2-GB drives. The server can

hold only four hard drives, and the workstations

only two. They have 10-MB network cards. For

the CADD work, what they have is okay. But if

they stay with MGE, Nigel Hutchinson wants

the drafters to draft and do feature coding. If

they do feature coding, they�ll need upgraded

hardware. Nigel Hutchinson believes that this

hardware should all be updated.

✈ MGE Training. The drafters need training in

MGE. They know they have to do the drawings

according to TSSDS, but they haven�t done

feature coding, so they�d need training. Nigel

Hutchinson sees a lot of variation in the abilities

of the incoming drafters. In the last two years,

they�ve had two first-termers and two second-

termers, who had relatively little AutoCAD

experience, although one has some surveying

experience. Learning MicroStation is always a

challenge. Nigel Hutchinson is conducting

classes next week on MicroStation for the two

new drafters. He would like to recommend

changes to the CE drafters� position so they will

include feature coding.

✈ Database Training. Nigel Hutchinson needs

MGE training. He has the basics, but he�s all self-

taught. He�s had Oracle and Oracle DBA training.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

He isn�t sure whether it�s better to use Oracle or

Access as a front end, considering both software

expense and training expense. Few people on

the base have any more than basic knowledge of

Access. There is no basewide Access training.

✈ Viewing Software. For viewing software,

Nigel Hutchinson says they haven�t decided on

any particular system. He�s open and is looking

for recommendations.

✈ Web-Enabled System. Nigel Hutchinson is in

favor of a web-enabled system, but he understands

that would involve many restrictions.

✈ Tabular Data Source. He sees IWIMS as the

best source for data that will feed the GIS. He

sees a lot of scope for development there. He

believes a daily or even a weekly dump from

WIMS would be sufficient. Up-to-the-minute

information isn�t critical for most nonstrategic

operations. Real-time BMS information could

also be linked as it is stored in SQL Server.

✈ Asbestos Mapping. Law mapped the RAFM

asbestos; they feature coded it in MGE and

delivered it in ArcView. It takes a long time for all

the queries to run and generate a display,

sometimes up to 30 minutes to run on P-233

with 16 MB of RAM. So people aren�t using it.

Another issue is that the drawings were done in

AutoCAD and exported as DGN for MGE. To edit

a single feature on a floor plan, he has to import

the AutoCAD drawing to MicroStation, update

it, export it, run a script to resymbolize it, and

alter the database to delete all records. It�s very

cumbersome to manage, and it�s easy to make

mistakes. Also, Law listed user names and

passwords in the documentation that went to all

users, which isn�t very secure. But if Nigel

Hutchinson changes those things, it causes

problems with another application Law

delivered. Law was told initially that there

would be MGE and Oracle expertise at every

base, but that wasn�t the case. Law has the

contract for backflow prevention, but the work

apparently wasn�t being done to match

American regulations with British regulations.

✈ Access/Response Times. Nigel Hutchinson

believes access times are a bit slow, but it may be

the 10-MB network cards. He will provide the

interview team with a sketch of his network. He

believes a bridge in the network may be slowing

response time. If Nigel Hutchinson is hitting the

server hard, it causes a significant slowdown for

the drafters. Nigel Hutchinson has no Internet

server. Now, the system Nigel Hutchinson has is

running fine, but it�s not being fully used. He

thinks the �fine� operation may be because the

system isn�t being pushed.

✈ GIS Software. CE expects Nigel Hutchinson to

define what GIS software they�ll use. He�s the

only one who has experience with networked

GIS. He asked about GDS and Sirius 7 (a product

that integrates with SmallWorld). GDS or one of

its predecessors came from Cambridge. Sirius 7

came from Edinburgh.

Nigel Hutchinson expects the following from the

GIS implementation plan:

✈ A plan with direction

✈ A relative time scale where possible, indicating

how long until a useful system will be in place

✈ Recommendations about position descriptions

✈ Review of workplace systems such as Active Asset

Manager for use in documenting workflows and

FM used in connection with existing floor plans

✈ Recommendations about work processes for

linking the maps

9-22 SECTION 9

Interview NotesR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

CE Associate Civil Engineer forMinistry of Defense (MOD)

✈ Name. Gary Ward

✈ Extension. 5670


✈ Interview Location. Gary Ward�s Office,

Building 443



Gary Ward is the MOD Civil Engineering

representative to the 100 CES. (Ian Smith was unable

to attend this scheduled interview due to

circumstances requiring his attention at another

DoD installation.) Gary Ward oversees a staff of more

than 30 people who all serve as �caretakers� of the

British interest at RAFM.

Gary Ward establishes the frequency of inspections

for construction and maintenance of facilities. The

UK staff under Gary will soon input information on

all inspection data directly into the Forward

Engineering Database. Database access security is

based on the role a person plays. Mr. Ward�s staff, as

well as their US counterparts, will access the

information as needed. The database will also be

accessed and used by MOD.

Here is an overview of Gary Ward�s top

responsibilities:

✈ Providing stewardship of the MOD estate (RAFM

and the local environment)

✈ Managing 33 people who also represent the

MOD interest as it relates to CE on the base

✈ Acting as the interface between the United

Kingdom construction industry and US visiting

forces at RAFM

✈ Acting as the highest local representative for all

contracted construction, which goes through

the Defense Estate Organization (DEO)

✈ Keeping US needs in focus within UK regulations

✈ Managing and administering Safe Systems of

Work (health and safety)


Gary Ward must have access to two types of

information

✈ Data maintained by the UK

✈ Data maintained by CE

Most is maintained in CE, but some is sensitive and

may be accessed only as part of the UK role. For that

reason, Gary has two PCs available in his office: one

for DoD (local LAN) and one for MOD.

His MOD PC is linked into the main MOD servers

and databases. He is also linked into Accounting

since a firewall is now in place to �hide� sensitive

data. He is excited about having RAF Lakenheath up

and available with interconnectivity in July 1998,

but also knows he may wait to see what can be

shown. To date, operational and security concerns

have kept the process slow.

Information that he uses on a regular basis includes

the following:

✈ Maintenance Engineering. From this group,

he uses an Engineering database to program

inspections and input findings. This allows him

to quickly access and review maintenance

inspection details and logbook entries. This has

been somewhat more time-consuming in the

past because a logbook stays with the item to be

maintained.

✈ Real Property Records. This tells how a

facility is being used. Gary Ward must look at

the facility�s potential/future changes based on

CE�s FUS and how that relates to maintenance

requirements.

✈ Work Requests. The standard process has been

that a notice first comes to MOD/DEO, and they

take the work request to US forces to be included



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

into WIMS. The US approves the work request,

and the repair, maintenance, or construction

takes place at the direction of the DEO. The UK

must approve the result and pay the contractor.

The UK invoices the US for payment. The process

basically starts with the WIMS, but it ends in the

Finance System.

Hazardous Areas. Gary Ward must have

information on hazards prior to submitting a

bid. For example, a database on statutory

regulations for confined spaces exists:

✯ Asbestos register

✯ Confined space

✯ IBDS (inhabited building distances) for

munitions sites, which is especially needed

as contractors go into those areas

✈ Manual System. Perhaps his most important

resource is a manual system that includes a

mimic board. This large board displays a

schematic of the electrical network with

magnetic symbols showing whether each switch

is open or closed. This relates to the control of

hazardous spaces, for example in relation to

controlling the high-voltage system.


✈ Real Property Records. MOD only has input

of demolition approval on Form 300. They have

no WIMS input access.

✈ Work-Required Process. MOD will assess and

put a dollar value on a maintenance item or a

construction project, to scope it properly in UK

currency. The project then comes back to the US

DoD for approval.

✈ Information on Hazardous Areas. MOD

directly adds to the asbestos database in use by

the Environmental Flight, although they do not

formally make edits/input to this system. Their

single biggest issue with the asbestos database is

for remediation of a site. The record is the only

access for asbestos data so it needs to be

maintained to show a more up-to-date picture of

where problems exist. Because of the importance

of environmental issues to the MOD, Gary Ward

has given one person of the UK staff over to the

EM flight.

✈ Confined Space Requirements for Access

and Safety. Two separate regulations and

practices, one is USAFE and one is MOD. MOD is

probably more distinct and kept in practice in

Wing Safety.

✈ US DoD Store manages stock of materials,

while the bill of materials (BOM) tells how many

of each need to be stocked. This data is kept in a

database called the CEMAS Abstract, which

comes to DEO to have the organization order or

purchase. When items are delivered, the items

are replaced on US records. The purchase of

materials is based on requirements of how many

of a certain item should be available on the base,

not by the specific job. So, US must let Gary

Ward know when an ordered item arrives, to say

it came in and that it�s now in stock. There is no

way to track the purchasing of materials, and so

on, for projects. What this means is that even

though there may be an item in stock per

regulations, it�s not project-based so they may

meet the regulation but short change the

project.

✈ The main role for which Gary Ward and the DEO

use CE maps is to give to UK contractors. This

becomes the contractors� reference for where to

deliver an item onto the base, where a project

site is on base, or for preliminary design of a

project on the base.

(For the digging permit, AF Form 103, they also

expect CADD drawings built by UK

construction. The standard to receive is

AutoCAD, but these files must still come back

into MicroStation version 5 or 95 for MOD

information to be consistent with CE.

✈ The DEO also maintains a tree survey of the

base. Every tree is plotted for location on the

9-24 SECTION 9

Interview NotesR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

base map, to help maintain health and safety of

trees. The last survey was completed in 1997 and

is maintained as a reference file in MicroStation

with data and reporting in Access.

MOD inputs inspection reports into the

database, but there�s no link between graphic

and nongraphic features.

✈ All MOD staff members have PCs. From a GIS

standpoint, their computing resources are

probably sufficient to meet current needs on

screen, but likely to be lacking in capability for

printers and plotters. At this time, all their

Pentium 100s may have to be replaced or

upgraded, depending on how their GIS needs

develop. For future GIS applications, they may

need upgrading for GIS capability.

✈ All MOD PCs have Internet access, but it is not

used as much as e-mail. In fact, they routinely

provide their Internet and e-mail addresses for

specification packages, sample drawings, and so

on. To consider the use of the LAN, they estimate

it looks something like this: The ratio of the use

for US LAN versus MOD link is 10:1. The base LAN

is heavily used while the MOD data sharing over a

wire is not as heavily used. This ratio is likely to

change in the future, especially as the two CE

organizations, representing USAF and MOD,

come closer together.

CE Computer Services Shop (100 CES)

✈ Name. Colin Smith

✈ Extension. 5667


✈ Interview Location. Work Room, Building

443


Edgerton, Tracy Kissler (AFCEE)


Colin Smith is responsible for administering the CE

computer system but not the CADD office. He controls

the CE side of the network and is the liaison between

CE users and the LAN Shop. In other words, he�s the

computer person for CE, other than CADD (Nigel

Hutchinson handles CADD). He is also a workgroup

manager under the LAN Shop.

Colin handles office applications (like Office Pro 97)

and IWIMS, performing a sort of �help desk� function.

He isn�t currently pulling any data from IWIMS to use

on PCs. If that were done for CE, Colin may be the

person to handle that. He�d coordinate with the

administrator at Ramstein, where there is a Unix server.

RAFM has had IWIMS for only a few months.

Colin administers the CE PCs. He has two staff

members, and he�s just starting to learn NT. He also

creates user accounts on the NetWare Server.

Colin and his staff administer all day-to-day users of

IWIMS. IWIMS functions include maintenance, real

property, heavy equipment, and so on, just as WIMS

did. He has set up a menu to give users access to work

orders.


Colin�s office just got an NT server, and he is

responsible for administering about 250 PCs in CE.

Colin has an Excel spreadsheet of computer

inventory data, tied to room number.

He also has an Excel spreadsheet of phone

connections, and he reports that the rooms in the

building have unique numbers.

Colin�s staff member Lisa is �mapping� locations of

CE PCs, printers, data outlets, and so on, by room

using Visio.


For year 2000 compliance, Colin must identify PCs

that will need to be replaced. So having a



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

geographically linked computer inventory would be

very beneficial to him.

He would like to tie the Visio data that Lisa is

creating into the GIS.

CE Customer Service (100 CES)

✈ Name. SSgt Brian Castillo

✈ Extension. 5635





Customer Service has the following responsibilities:

✈ Handle all work requests for daily maintenance

and assign them to shops. This organization

receives/evaluates the work request and uses

WIMS. Customer Service receives a high volume

of calls, including emergency service calls and

customer enquiries.

✈ Track status of work requests (both 332s and

1219s) and 103s (digging permits). 332s are more

common than 1219s (routine maintenance/

repair).

✈ Provide information to customers/requesters.

✈ Handle formal requests for bigger work and

contract work.

✈ Coordinate scheduled utility outages with

facility.

✈ Retrieve and monitor performance information

for the operations flight.

✈ Update facility managers� data and provide

facility manager training.

The Customer Service desk has daily hours. Calls

during off-hours are handled by the Fire

Department.


Customer Service uses tracking logs to record dates

sent, date status changed, and so on. They run user-

defined reports from WIMS. They also create special

IDs for contract managers so they can track who has a

particular project.

Tracking logs provide historical information about

each requirement, including the following:

✈ Tracking information (who has the requirement

and where it has been)

✈ Work status information

✈ Approval information (who has approved it and

for how much)

✈ Type of service information (upgrade/

downgrade information)

✈ Authorization information

The need for this type of information is mainly just

in Customer Service. However, outside customers do

need information on 332s.

The WIMS database tracks the following

information:

✈ The 332s (written requests) and service calls

(verbal requests)

✈ The 103s (a variety of people generate 103s)

For the AF Forms 332, the following topics were

discussed:

✈ The database doesn�t publish power outages.

There�s no way to do so.

✈ Work location is a text field, so it can be very

open. It could refer to a facility or the whole base.

✈ Customer Service frequently refers to the work

order and project number.

9-26 SECTION 9

Interview NotesR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

✈ The work description lists the task to be

accomplished, which is the same as on the 103.

✈ Some 103s are filled in from FormFlow, but some

aren�t. The process would be streamlined and

duplicate entry would be prevented if all were

handled this way.

✈ All information mentioned so far is from WIMS,

and all lists/reports can be customized.

On the topic of current technology, all Customer

Service staff members have full-time access to a PC.

They also have Internet access and frequently use it

for official business. Most of them use Access, Excel,

PowerPoint, and Word. For all shops, they print lists

of open projects from WIMS.

In IWIMS, they are just using the report capability

now. Unlike in WIMS, they no longer have capability

to write data out to Excel or Word, but they can send

it to a printer. Reports in WIMS could be exported to

other applications, but IWIMS doesn�t have the same

capacity to allow users to export report data.

Work orders were also discussed: The remarks screen

can be up to 80 pages, and it can list who/what/when/

where�whatever it takes to make the request clear.

For customers, Customer Service does three main

things using work orders:

✈ Answer questions on the work status of a project.

✈ Assess all processes and customer requirements.

✈ Alert users to power outages.

Do It Now (DIN) was also discussed. DIN refers to

quick repairs that Customer Service directs or

manages. DIN trucks may also be assigned to routine

maintenance, but they generally work on emergency

and urgent repairs.

CE Environmental Flight (100 CES)

✈ Name. Simon Austin (Storage Tanks), John

Deyoe (Cleanup and ECAMP), Chris Gluck

(Hazardous Waste), Dave Nutt (Asbestos and

Natural/Cultural Resources)

✈ Extension. Dave Parks 5829, John Deyoe 5828,

Dave Nutt 5835




Hutchinson (CE)


According to the Environmental Quality Plan (October

1997) for RAFM, the 100 CES/CEV is charged with

the task of meeting the requirements of HQ USAFE/

CEV�s Environmental Standards of Excellence (SOE)

program, as it was developed in 1994. The SOE

program is aggressively administered by HQ USAFE�s

Environmental Protection Committee (EPC) and is

based on the final governing standards in effect in

Europe, Air Force Policy, and good management

practices. The SOE program identifies the critical

elements of 26 environmental programs and

subprograms, provides a tool to baseline program

performance and measure improvement, and

establishes an achievable but challenging vision of

�environmental excellence.�

The SOE program is divided into four �pillars� that

define different aspects of this program:

✈ Compliance Pillar, which assures that present

USAFE operations comply with all local, DoD,

and USAFE environmental standards. Specific

programs addressed under this pillar include

these:

✯ ECAMP, the Environmental Compliance

Assessment and Management Program

✯ Hazardous waste management



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

✯ PCB management

✯ Storage tank management

✯ Water system management

✯ Wastewater system management

✯ Asbestos management

✯ Lead-based paint management

✯ Air quality management

✯ Radon management

✯ OEAs (host nation Open Enforcement

Actions)

✯ Pesticide management

✯ Deicing program

✯ Hazardous materials management

✈ Cleanup Pillar, which focuses on assessing

and remediating pollution resulting from past

activities and restoring contaminated sites to

safe conditions. The objectives of this pillar

include these:

✯ Completion of all risk assessments by the

end of fiscal year 1997

✯ Completion of cleanup at high-risk sites (or

alternatively to have remediation systems in

place) by the end of fiscal year 2003

✈ Conservation Pillar, which focuses on

incorporating environmental considerations

into sound planning practices and has the

following specific programs:

✯ Environmental Impact Analysis Process

(EIAP)

✯ Noise

✯ Natural resources

✯ Cultural resources

✯ Opportunities and constraints

✈ Pollution Prevention Pillar, which concerns

issues within all areas of USAFE operations and

the acquisition process. The goal is preventing

future pollution by accomplishing the

following:

✯ Reducing the use of hazardous materials at

the source

✯ Reducing solid waste that goes to municipal

landfills (including recycling)

✯ Preventing environmental releases of

pollutants from hazardous materials/waste

activities which remain necessary

Nine people make up this single branch. All work must

meet UK Final Governing Standards (FGS). The CEV

staff includes one person from DEO who also serves as

the Environmental Agency (EA) liaison officer.

Recycling and hazardous waste management

programs are managed by CEV.

CEV reviews/approves all projects that come out of Base

Operations, including the Wing Commander�s plans.


The most important database CEV has is the ECAMP.

It�s the most important single item for compliance.

ECAMP is an annual program with all findings/

actions tracked monthly until closed out.

✈ Map C-1 series base maps from 1986-1987. These

are very detailed maps at 1:500 scale. That may

not have been the original mapping scale, but it

seems to have accurate placement.

✈ Map B series, both B-1 and B-2, dated September

1995. The EQP states that these were delivered in

a GIS format, but John Deyoe indicated that they

were now taking these to a contractor to develop

GIS, as they have purchased ESRI ArcView

software.

Another CEV database includes the EA consent to

discharge permits.

9-28 SECTION 9

Interview NotesR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

DEO/MOD data is virtually all paper; there are very

few if any databases for environmentally related

information that CEV could use.


An environmental database is critically needed to

allow management of the environmental program.

CEV has several databases either completed or in

process, but the following are definitely required:

✈ Tanks (UST/AST) and UST tank manager

information

✈ Asbestos

✈ Natural and cultural resources sites

✈ Noise

✈ Soil and groundwater contamination (including

groundwater monitoring wells)

✈ PCB contamination (RAFM is PCB-free) data

relative to electrical transformers/other equipment

✈ Lead-based paint contamination

✈ Hazardous material (Hazmat) basewide,

including storage and hazardous waste

accumulation points

✈ Catch pits/soak-aways

✈ Wastewater permitted outfalls (consented)

✈ Air quality

✈ ECAMP

✈ Backflow prevention/devices (under potable

water)

✈ Sewage treatment-samples

✈ Monitoring systems; contractor-provided review

and results

✈ Used/recyclable oil tanks

✈ Facilities with halon (not maintenance

engineering), although halon is being phased out

✈ EPA-17 toxins

✈ Septic tanks and sanitary sewage

✈ Wastewater effluent

✈ Storm drainage

✈ Water quality

✈ Petroleum, oil, and lubricants (POL)

✈ Hazardous materials; all from Hazmat Pharmacy

Supply is now the POC for this information.

✈ Deicing runoff/containment

✈ Municipal solid waste

✈ OEAs-open enforcement actions

✈ EIAP (Environmental Impact Assessment

Program), whose users need information about

sites; such as for a new building; they need to be

able to assess concerns such as �what happens

when you dig in a certain place?�

The database for tanks will show the big turnover in

who manages the information. It�s normally out-of-

date. Ideally, they would prefer to key on a tank to get

information about it and determine who the tank

custodian is. When custodians change, CEV needs to

know in order to track who is responsible. They don�t

have adequate information about that at this point.

CEV is building a database of survey results. For

example, ANG units will be on base this summer (1998)

as part of their two-week training programs. The

engineering members will develop the certification

level of accuracy for oil/water interceptors or separators.

The database will be in MS Access. Most information is

now in MS Access or MS Excel.

CEV�s database development will relate only to the

US side. The DEO and UK will keep an entirely

different set of information about the base. John

Deyoe mentioned that in the CEV database, 3D

models of plumes for air quality and ground

percolation will be possible.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

CE Fire and Rescue (100 CES)

✈ Name. CMSgt Larry Jackson (Chief), TSgt Dave

Lawrence, MSgt Baker

✈ Extension. 2408




McFarlane, Nigel Hutchinson (CE)


Fire and Rescue is primarily responsible for two things:

✈ Providing emergency response

✈ Managing the information needed for

emergency response (such as the EIS)


Current data includes the following:

✈ Local maps show up to 12 miles out and 10 km

off end of each runway.

✈ Base maps have been created from aerial

photography and high-altitude photo shots.

These maps extend out 29 miles, but they were

scanned to create raster images and �enlarged�

to show smaller areas.

The Emergency Information System (EIS) is used

especially for chemical modeling. It�s from Vector

Research, Inc. Many DoD installations are using it. It

comes from a company in Huntington, UK. These

aspects of the system were discussed:

✈ The EIS is in the alarm room and on laptops in

trucks.

✈ EIS maps are based on a tiling structure.

✈ The EIS can include a digital alarm system, but

they don�t expect to use it because the Andover

alarm system is OS/2 at this time.

✈ The EIS has been successful for Fire and Rescue

and will probably be beneficial for other users,

like Readiness and Security.

✈ The EIS will probably go to Windows 98. It

currently has an ArcView 3.0 interface.

✈ The EIS includes sites, hazards, people, site

planning, infrastructure, and so on.

✈ EIS uses a raster database and can access a tabular

database.

It includes Area Locations of Hazardous Areas

(ALOHA).

Fire and Rescue also has the Fire Safety Deficiency

(FSD) Program. These aspects of the FSD were

discussed:

✈ They watch for these items on 332s; they must

see if FSDs are on 332s for projects.

✈ Fire and Rescue is building its own FSD database.

✈ WIMS doesn�t support tracking FSDs.

✈ Tech Services inspects facilities annually.

The following general problem areas were discussed:

✈ Lack of site information for munitions storage

✈ Duplicated and possibly outdated information

for the Hazmat Pharmacy

✈ Difficulty of determining which alarm is out of

service

✈ Need to track 332s because any facility work may

affect the alarms or deluge systems

✈ Need to identify what the Fire Department is

doing, where a plume is, where the firefighters

are, and so on; essential for making decisions

and determining where people should go and

how to block off an area

They�re looking at Automated Civil Engineer System

(ACES) FD. ACES will be Oracle 7 with an Access

front end.

9-30 SECTION 9

Interview NotesR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd


A big issue is that they�d like to use EIS/GIS for

command/trucks, so that certain people can get

information in their trucks.

Recall is also a big issue to FD/CE/CP. They want the

ability to automatically recall key people. Right now

this is a manual process. They hope to someday

invest in an automated system for this process that

could save human resources and time.

For the EIS, Fire and Rescue needs the following:

✈ Good (new) base mapping

✈ Good (updated) utility maps

✈ Digital (updated) floor plans (they have just

paper copies now)

✈ Information on projects

Another topic discussed is the Dialogic

Communicator, which is the first step in automating

the dialing process for recalls. This software has been

purchased, but it�s not yet in place. Dialogic is a

computerized system initiative for the �recall�

system. (Comm says it�s the top unfunded year-end

program for Comm on base.) The limiting factor at

this time is the number of phone lines, which is

especially true for offbase, where BT doesn�t have

that many lines available.

The following needs from a GIS interface were

discussed:

✈ Mapping capabilities

✈ 3D plumes

✈ Some light Hazmat

✈ Outside base information

They understand that using ACES FD locally would

require pulling the information from a centralized

database (a hallmark of ACES) and applying it to

their needs in a format other than ACES.

Communications Squadron (Comm)(100 CS)

✈ Name. Michael O�Rourke, Steve Perry

✈ Extension. 5649


✈ Interview Location. Michael O�Rourke�s

Office, Building 568


Hutchinson (CE)


Here is an overview of the Communications

Squadron�s top responsibilities:

✈ Designing, administering, and maintaining the

fiberoptic communication network

✈ Designing, administering, and maintaining all

other communication cables

✈ Installing any type of communications services

on base

✈ Tracking all communications services on base


Communications technology is vast at RAFM. Based

on Comm�s foresight, they have aggressively worked

to build a strong network that currently connects

every building on base to the LAN. With a LAN hub

in every building, they may have the largest LAN in

USAFE. The base is ready to support an areawide ATM

structure. Fast Ethernet exists at facility level. Central

communications are on a CISCO network, including

V-LAN with OC3 and OC12s driving the background

on an ITN backbone. Communications estimates

that there is room for more than 6,500 PCs in the

base�s 197 buildings, all of which could include

printers. CATV is possible over at least part of the

fiberoptic network.

Most information that Comm deals with is accessed



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

through their use of CRIMP from Cablesoft, Ltd.

CRIMP is a COTS product used by the

telecommunications industry (British Telecom and

others) that allows for detailed records of the

telephone system on base. CRIMP pulls in anything

that can be queried using standard SQL commands,

as well as graphics from DWG/DXF/others, with the

exception of MicroStation. CRIMP is operational on

an NT server in Building 568 and has been in use for

almost three years. Comm develops system drawings

for its own use and for the central repository at the

38th Comm Squad at Tinker AFB, Oklahoma.

The CRIMP database tells where communications

features are in relation to a building. The

information could be geographically related, if they

had a graphic to import into the system, such as a

floor plan from CE�s facility utilization study (FUS).

File formats currently prevent this attachment.

The Comm Squad maintains a server �farm,� with all

servers located at a central point (except for a few

small isolated servers such as CE�s). They are

considering installing a MicroStation server for the

storage and use of floor plan data, although almost

all RAFM Self-Help program information comes in as

AutoCAD graphic files.

At time of the interview, Comm knew of 12,223

telephones on base. CRIMP provides related

information, such as the quantity and location of all

circuits, but it does so without a geographic

reference. Comm expects to implement the newest

Windows version of CRIMP, which will help solve

some of these issues, following a physical survey of

the base or as drawing files are brought into the

CRIMP environment.

CRIMP is the GUI for all database and graphic

information in use. Comm would like to have good

floor plans to use with their telephone data. They

acquire raw data from British Telecom (BT) and, in a

large-scale database, they use MS Access to track circuits

and updated cable information from BT. At this time,

BT owns all cabling on base that isn�t fiberoptic.

Because of Comm�s efforts, RAFM and BT have a very

good working relationship. Their near-term goal is to

transfer all BT copper to fiberoptic lines.

CRIMP contains a great deal of information about

communications at RAFM. This information

includes the following:

✈ Cable locations

✈ Locations of communications features in a

building, which are not yet but could be

geographically related if they had good floor

plans in a format that could be read by CRIMP

✈ Number of service drops

✈ Number of lines available; with the advent of

technology, users constantly want to know how

many they have available and whether they

could have more

✈ Vast knowledge about the speed of the lines

One of the problems they have is that CRIMP as a

program is outdated. It�s coming up quickly as

additional human resources come on line, but it�s

not there yet.

Information they use that is supplied by others

includes the following:

✈ CE Facility Floor Plans. Comm needs good

floor plans of all buildings on RAFM to insert

their telephone-related data. This applies to

CRIMP. While the capability isn�t yet there, they

hope that CRIMP will soon be able to bring in

MicroStation design files (DGN).

There�s a good chance that much duplication exists

between CE and Comm in the drawings each

maintains.

✈ Circuits. Comm uses a large-scale Access

database of raw information to track circuits

(SCXC). It includes updated cable information

from BT. BT owns the cable plan with the

exception of the fiberoptic communications

lines. CRIMP is the GUI for all database

information.

CSIR. This is the process for pooling military

drawings that have floor plans, which are kept as

9-32 SECTION 9

Interview NotesR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

a sort of central library at the 38th at Tinker.

In all, they use any applicable information from

others that they can get. If the data were up-to-date,

it would probably be used very heavily, but even

then, not as much as it would be if there were a

graphic component.


For the future, Michael O�Rourke and Steve Perry

want to accomplish the following:

✈ Telecom Upgrades. They would like to replace

all copper wire with fiberoptic, improving

service and placing all cables completely under

the base�s control. BCE supports the move to all

fiberoptic communications. CE is about to finish

the Senior Married Quarters for fire alarms as

part of the fiberoptic network with related

communications.

✈ Information. They�d like to link graphic and

nongraphic data in CRIMP, especially

information with a geographic perspective such

as the FUS digital floor plans. If this information

were available, it would be heavily used. A big

step for them would be the ability to overlay the

network diagram to accurately fit the base map.

Mike O�Rourke retires in 1999 and Steve Perry will

probably take his slot.

To sum up their needs, floor plans are the key to

future management of information in the Comm

Squadron.

LAN Shop (100 CS)

✈ Name. MSgt Kevin Fifield, Capt Chad LeMaire,

Capt Andrew D. Williams

✈ Extension. 7002, 4256

✈ Dates and Times. 9 June 1998, 1315-1430 and

18 November 1998, 1300-1515



Edgerton, Joe Zumwald, Nigel Hutchinson (CE)


MSgt Fifield is the chief of network administration

for the LAN Shop, which is part of the Air Force

Network Control Center (CC).

Network Management, comprising both Network

Configuration Management and the Information

Protection Office (IPO), is responsible for operating,

maintaining, and installing existing and new devices

on and in the RAF Mildenhall ATM backbone. New

devices include, but are not limited to, routers, ATM

equipment, building hubs, and new systems coming

online (not to be confused with desktop PCs).

Network Management also stipulates system

configuration guidelines and security requirements.

All new systems must meet the security constraints

outlined, and if special cases are presented, they will

be considered on a case-by-case basis. Unique systems

are located outside the LAN Shop throughout the

base, which are primarily NT boxes. Also included in

the LAN Shop are network managers who handle

intranet and Internet connectivity within RAFM.

The LAN Shop has a multi-tiered support system,

with a centralized help desk for first-line user

support. Some network responsibility is distributed

throughout the RAFM operating units.


The LAN Shop runs an ATM infrastructure with fiber

backbone. It�s a one-stop shop for networking. They



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

run Novell 4.1 and NT 4.0 and may go to a single NT

network operating system (NOS) in 1999. They�re

waiting on NT release 5 for that.

RAFM has about 3,800 connected PCs. All new

systems that come online must meet the security

requirements outlined.

The LAN Shop is enthusiastic about the opportunity

to participate in the GIS project from concept to plan

to implementation. In particular, they are interested

in seeing hardware/software/networking

specifications and in being informed well ahead of

time about any LAN Shop involvement.

Security Forces (100 SFS)

✈ Name. TSgt Brad Jansen, SSgt Jamien Parks

✈ Extension. 3191, 3179


✈ Interview Location. Training Room, Building

632




Security Forces Squadron (SF) deals with the entire

base population. They interact with other agencies

for flightline security, resource protection, and police

services.

TSgt Windham is also responsible for counter-

terrorism. As the installation focal point for anti-

terrorism, it is imperative that Security Forces possess

or have immediate access to building floor plans and

utility (electricity, gas lines, water pipes, and

telephone lines) information. This would be

beneficial for the Security Forces Operations Center

for implementation during terrorist activity, hostage

situations, or barricaded suspects.

In response to possible chemical or biological

incidents, aircraft accidents, and so on, immediate

coordination with Disaster Preparedness (CEX),

Wing Command Post, Fire Response, HAZMAT, and

other Disaster Response Forces is paramount. Aircraft

data, weather (wind speed and direction) data, and

emergency response cordon sizes are key initial

elements.

Flight Schedules are required from Wing

Maintenance Operations Center (MOC), AMSS

MOC, and SOG MOC as notification of aircraft

arrivals/departures. This ensures that aircraft are

authorized for movement, without having to verify

with Base Operations and/or the Control Tower

personnel, thus taking up valuable time.

The Security Operations Center (SOC) monitors the

Joint Services Interior Intrusion Detection System

(JSIIDS) alarms and ongoing incidents, such as

assaults, domestic disturbances, unsecured buildings,

contractors, traffic accidents, and traffic stops. The

SOC controller notifies and dispatches appropriate

numbers of patrols to neutralize unannounced alarm

activations, domestic disturbances, and assaults.

They also receive and transmit information for

names of building custodians, warrants checks

during traffic stops, contractors that are authorized

onto the base, and personnel data for verification of

restricted area entry authorization.

For every person in SF, there are about 35 different

categories of information to track, like weapons

authorization, appointments, and so on. SF also

tracks medical and dental appointments as well as

quality/customer service meetings for SF staff. SSgt

Parks must do that over the phone, since most of

those people don�t have computer access. But the SF

work schedules change frequently, he must then

often change appointments, which takes a great deal

of coordination.


Currently, Security Forces receives the above-

mentioned information through e-mail, Base Intra-

Transfer System (BITS), computer-generated rosters,

On-Call �Memorandum For� letters, Entry Authority

Lists, portable radios, and telephone (direct and dial

9-34 SECTION 9

Interview NotesR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

type) lines with the appropriate base agencies.

Information provided is not always accurate

(building custodian rosters) or timely (on-call

letters). This is a constant task, ensuring agencies

update the information and provide it to the SFS.

Once received, this information is posted in one of

several binders and folders.

A database already exists so that inquiries can be

made for vehicle registrations. Controllers refer to

checklists for different incidents and actions to take.

Once this is done, they will ascertain what size

cordon is needed and they will manually plot the

cordons. They also identify traffic control points and

buildings to be evacuated. Various other tasks are

followed per the checklist.

SF has Security Police Automated System (SPAS), but

it has a lot of flaws. It gives them access to training

information, weapons qualifications, and so on. It�s

also used elsewhere on base for reporting. They�re

required by regulation to use SPAS, but they end up

supplementing it with their own systems.

SPAS mainly records information on a staff member

basis. For coordinating training information, they

use paper or e-mail. They don�t have a coordinated

database system. It�s a very complex process.

SPAS is FoxPro-based. SF also uses Access. SPAS is Air

Force-wide, but its reporting capabilities are very

limited. Every year, they get a new SPAS version.

They have version 7 now, and 8 is already in the

works. SSgt Parks has everything in Access that he

now tracks in SPAS, and more.

They also use PC3, an old Air Force system that�s

somewhat more functional than SPAS. That�s the Air

Force personnel system, organized by job

description. It records who is authorized to do what,

based on job classifications.

They don�t have problems with rosters. SSgt Parks�

Access system helps with them.

But they don�t yet have anything interactive that

warns about appointment/shift conflicts. No one

else in SF can use the Access system, as most of them

have no access to computers. Only sergeants and

supervisors have access to computers. They also don�t

have e-mail working perfectly.


SF is responsible for the defense plan for the whole

base, so they need maps for that. They use them for

training and real-world situations. They need to

know what buildings are alarmed, where the alarms

are, where the power shutoffs are, and so on. They

must now request hardcopies from CE for that,

which takes far too much time. They�re always way

behind with that kind of data. They�d like to be able

to access all that data on computer, with plotting

capabilities.

A computerized program that is dedicated/tailored to

emergency response agencies is a definite asset. This

program could be configured similar to the �Battle

Lab� computer systems, which allow the operator to

make inputs to the scenarios and then the computer

does most of the work, such as these examples:

✈ Calculating cordon size

✈ Estimating the amount of personnel needed for

traffic control points

✈ Identifying which buildings need to be

evacuated

✈ Determining who the building custodians are

(primary and alternate) as well as their duty and

home telephone numbers

✈ Identifying types of aircraft with specific

vulnerabilities/danger areas

✈ Monitoring weather conditions

For situations/incidents concerning buildings, the

SFS will need to have the blueprints to the building

and the exact location of the utilities for easier shut

off. This will help the on-scene commander to

determine the course of action. The floor plans will

be needed in case an assault is directed.

In addition, the information transmission lines will



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

need to be constructed or protected to meet emission

security standards for information being transmitted

or used.

With all these capabilities, they could do much more

realistic training scenarios. Training is their biggest

issue. For example, they could download a certain

dataset onto a CD that includes certain scenarios. For

training, they could use both the graphics and text

that describes the insides of buildings. With a GIS-

based system, they would be able to test scenarios

before they use them in training situations.

This information would also be used by CE, Supply

(who has to determine whether a certain piece of

equipment will fit in a certain room), and Services

for base housing (like to identify the right-size

housing for a certain family).

For TDY staff at RAFM, there could even be a kiosk

with base maps to help them find their way around.

Some of that information could also be useful for the

external web page.

TSgt Jansen and SSgt Parks are both very enthusiastic

about the GIS.

Lodging Maintenance (LM) (100 SVS)

✈ Name. Jack Martin

✈ Extension. 2893


✈ Interview Location. Jack Martin�s Office,

Building 644


Edgerton


Jack Martin is in charge of maintenance for 10 lodging

facilities that include 400 rooms. His operation handles

minor maintenance. Linda in Jack Martin�s office

receives maintenance calls. AF Form 332s are submitted

to CE for work that requries a contractor; all other jobs

are submitted on a form 1219.

LM submits paperwork to CE for the jobs they cannot

handle, but the only way LM has to track the status

of these calls is to walk over and get a printout each

week from Customer Service.

LM handles about 14 CE services calls a week. They

are in phone contact with CE every day. CE enters

each call into WIMS, which generates a project

number. CE then calls LM back with the number.

LM is responsible for getting all types of maintenance

done, such as recurring maintenance like interior

painting, but they don�t have a fixed schedule.

Everything is logged into the computer daily. They

also keep an inventory of TV and VCR serial numbers

and service. And they track costs of TV and VCR

repair, to ensure that they don�t spend more than 75

percent of a unit�s cost on maintenance.

LM is also responsible for coordinating major repair

projects like reroofing. They track that kind of

information by project number, not by building

number. Some of those large projects span years (Jack

Martin mentioned one that began in 1992 and is still

active).


LM has PCs. They back up their internal records of

calls onto floppies each month. They use Microsoft

Office (in particular, Microsoft Word) for logging call

data. The information is set up as a Word table.

Jack Martin doesn�t use many maps and graphics;

what he needs, he gets from CE. He gets copies of

floor plans and general base maps from CE, including

a specialized map that lists data pertinent to LM. He

reports that getting this information from CE works

well for him. He finds them to be very helpful,

although it does take a couple of days. He�d like to be

able to pull up floor plans on his PC and print them

as needed.

LM has e-mail but no access to WIMS. Jack Martin

handles much of his question-asking in person.

9-36 SECTION 9

Interview NotesR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd


Jack Martin wants to be able to access work orders by

project number to check status, determine who�s

doing the work, and so on. He currently doesn�t

always keep his work order records up-to-date

because it�s so slow.

He needs a way to check on something like how long

ago a certain building�s roof was replaced or how

long ago a certain building was redecorated inside.

He has to check with CE for that. Having that data

would be very beneficial to him.

For planning, Jack Martin is responsible for creating a

three- to five-year plan for future projects. He does

those plans by building. CE requires him to submit

this plan. To create the plan, Jack Martin relies on his

memory and knowledge, since he has so little

computer data.

C2IPS Operations (627 AMSS)

✈ Name. Tony Ramirez

✈ Extension. 2596

✈ Date and Time. 22 June 1998


✈ Interviewers. Nigel Hutchinson (CE)


Command and Control Information Processing

System (C2IPS) is part of the 627th Air Mobility

Support Squadron (AMSS). Tony Ramirez is the C2IPS

database system administrator. His responsibility is

to create users, set security, and perform system

backups and other general system administration

tasks such as hardware and software maintenance

and help desk operations.


C2IPS is a tracking mechanism for aircraft movement

for HQ AMC at Scott AFB, Illinois. At HQ AMC, the

Global Decision Support System (GDSS) is the

management-level database, while C2IPS is one level

down. The purpose of C2IPS is to track both assigned

and transient aircraft at a base.

C2IPS is an Oracle database running on the DEC

3000 platform as a server with connected

workstations running an Oracle Client interface.

Currently there are 33 workstations tied into the

server, with 25 used daily. There are about 200 users,

or shifts, using the database 24 hours a day, seven

days a week, at some level of intensity. The most

aggressive use occurs during normal flying hours. All

users have C2IPS on a desktop configuration with no

direct access to the file server itself. The

communications processor for these workstations

also serves as a firewall.

GDSS and C2IPS both have two-way updating

communications capabilities, and they can also

communicate with other remote C2IPS installations.

For example, RAFM�s C2IPS can �talk� to Ramstein

AB�s C2IPS, but they are not configured for true data

sharing capabilities.

Data within the C2IPS for tracking aircraft include

the following:

✈ Aircraft tail number

✈ Mission number

✈ Aircrew

✈ Fuel load

✈ Weight of cargo

✈ Passengers on- and off-board at the airfield

All information tracked in the two databases is digital,

with rigid data validation on both. Users are able to

update either system, but permission must first be

granted from HQ AMC. Data can be managed by user,

such as AMC manages database information for its

assigned parking hardstands.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

C2IPS also has a graphic aircraft parking plan for the

base, but it is strictly that. There is a link to the tabular

information in the database, but querying is limited.

Actual reporting capability is minimal at this time.

This may be a factor in how much C2IPS is used. For

instance, Base OPS was given a workstation, but

found it was not used. No training in the use of the

database was given to the staff. The workstation went

unused, so it was removed and is no longer available.

GDSS can be accessed over the Internet, and all users

have Internet access only from desktop PCs. All

workstations accessing C2IPS are dedicated to the

database server and have a DEC version of Notepad

with simple e-mail capabilities. All PCs have access to

a monochrome printer.

The MOC, Wing, and SOG all use the information in

the C2IPS and have workstations in their own offices.

Some of the information that is not available now,

that would be heavily used if it were, includes the

following:

✈ Airfield Operations Mapping (Map E-series)

✈ Fuels (Map G-7) and related operations data on

fuels

✈ Hardstand weight capacities for planning fuel

loads


Because of the minimal reporting capabilities in the

C2IPS database, the next version of the database is

slated for increased reporting functionality. The

database is not designed for sharing information

outside the system, so a front end is in development

to tie the C2IPS database into a web server. Again, no

graphic queries are planned, only the ability to

submit forms to retrieve text reports.

The use of the C2IPS database, in its current

configuration, is considered too slow as users�

information needs outgrew hardware capabilities.

With that realization, the next versions of the

database are coming on a true client/server

configuration running locally on users� PCs.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Section 10: GIS Prototype

Figure 22�RAF Mildenhall GIS Prototype

The goal of the GIS prototype is to present a

self-running demonstration that can show the

usefulness of open data access and basewide sharing,

while also showing the steps of a stylized

�emergency� situation.

This �show-and-tell� type of prototype uses the

following scenario to graphically display the use of

the tools and data mentioned throughout this plan.

10-2 SECTION 10

GIS PrototypeR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

On a cloudy, cool June afternoon, a call is received at

the Post Office claiming that a bomb has been mailed

to RAFM. Security Forces are immediately notified,

and the first response is to establish a cordon around

the Post Office. Using the framework data and GIS

tools mentioned in this report, the following events

occur at a rapid pace:

Security Forces quickly assesses the framework data

via the GeoMedia Web Map tool to display the base

map information.

1

Figure 23�Base Map Screen (above), and zoomed in to locate Post Office (below).



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Figure 24�Web Map showing building names and locations within buffer.

Once displayed, the query capability of Web Map

allows the user to establish a 200-foot buffer around

the Post Office. From this buffer, Web Map next

generates a list of facilities that fall within or

intersect the cordon.

After the facilities are identified, the next action item

is to immediately locate the names, office

designations, and telephone numbers of each of the

facility managers.

2

10-4 SECTION 10

GIS PrototypeR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

In the framework data, the MGE environment

contains a subset of information from the IWIMS

(ACES) database with this information. Web Map

allows the user to identify each affected facility on

the screen and view the information needed to

notify the facility manager.

Figure 25�Database information is accessed via Web Map.

3



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Once this list is complete, a member of the Security

Forces team calls each of the facility managers to

initiate the evacuation process. (In the future, the

potential exists for automating this calling process.)

All facility managers are notified except for Building

443, the CE Building. Since no one answers the call, a

team mobilizes to move on foot to notify the people

in that building to evacuate.

To make sure the evacuation is complete, the

Security Forces team first needs a copy of the floor

plans for Building 443. Once again, the user applies

another function in Web Map to enhance this

process.

4

Figure 26�A floor plan for Building 443 is accessed.

10-6 SECTION 10

GIS PrototypeR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

By accessing the framework data, in this case the

floor plan drawing�a MicroStation design file�the

user can apply the redline function in Web Map to

note changes to the floor plan drawing for Building

443. The changes can be printed out on 8.5" x 11" or

11" x 17" page to be used as the team enters the

building to notify and evacuate civil engineering

staff. Once complete, the user saves the changes in a

Web Map format .cgm file to later send to CEOM.

Once in the building, the team splits in two to cover

the interior spaces more effectively and move staff

out as quickly as possible. The western portion of the

building goes quickly, but in the eastern portion

there is a problem: the floor plan shows a hallway

where a wall has been removed. In fact, since the last

major renovation in 1998-99, there is an entire office

suite that has been reconfigured. The changes are

noted on the print, and the rest of the building is

evacuated.

Figure 27�A removed wall is noted with the redline function.

5



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Later that afternoon, as the bomb scare proves to be a

hoax, the Security Forces user reopens the saved floor

plan design file in Web Map redlines a note to

indicate what they found in the building. The .cgm

file is then e-mailed to CEOM to update the floor

plan drawing. In CEOM, the CADD Drafter who is

responsible for reviewing and responding to the

redlines can look at the .cgm and make the necessary

changes or, if needed, save the .cgm file in

MicroStation to use as a reference for maintaining

the floor plan drawings.

As a result of this process, should this situation ever

happen again, the GIS will provide access to

up-to-date CEOM files at the user�s reach.

6

Figure 28�The Redline Maintenance Manager keeps a record of redlined filesto be checked by CEOM.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Section 11: Abbreviations and Acronyms

A

This section contains the full names of many abbreviations and

acronyms used throughout this plan.

✈ AAFES: Army-Air Force Exchange Service

✈ AB: Air Base

✈ ACES: Automation Civil Engineer System

✈ ACES-HM: Automation Civil Engineer System�Housing Module

✈ AFB: Air Force Base

✈ AFCEE: Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence

✈ AFCESA: Air Force Civil Engineer Support Activity

✈ AFRES: Air Force Reserve

✈ ALOHA: Area Locations of Hazardous Areas

✈ AM: Airfield Management

✈ AMC: Air Mobility Command

✈ AMC-C2IPS: Air Mobility Command�Command and Control

Information Processing System

✈ AMSS: Air Mobility Support Squadron

✈ ANG: Air National Guard

✈ APA: American Planning Association

✈ ARW: Air Refueling Wing

✈ AST: aboveground storage tank

✈ ATG: Automatic Tank Gauging

✈ ATM: Asynchronous Transfer Method

✈ BCE: Base Civil Engineer

✈ BCP: Base Comprehensive Plan

✈ B&CE: Building & Construction Engineer

✈ BITS: Base Intra-Transfer System

✈ BMS: Building Management System

B

11-2 TABLE OF CONTENTS

RA

F M

ilden

hal

l, E

ng

lan

d

✈ BOM: bill of materials

✈ bps: bits per second

✈ BT: British Telecom

✈ C2IPS: see AMC-C2IPS

✈ CADD: computer-aided design and drafting

✈ CAMEO: trade name for plume modeling software

✈ CAMS: Consolidated Aircraft Maintenance System

✈ CATV: cable television

✈ CC: Control Center

✈ CD-ROM: compact disc read-only memory

✈ CD: compact disc

✈ CE: Civil Engineering

✈ CEOM: Civil Engineering Operations Maintenance

✈ CES: Civil Engineering Squadron

✈ CEV: Civil Engineering Environmental

✈ CISCO: manufacturer�s trade name for network hub products

✈ CMASS: DEO supply stores management software

✈ COTS: commercial off-the-shelf

✈ CP: Command Post

✈ CPU: central processing unit

✈ CRIMP: tradename for Cablesoft brand network management

tools

✈ CRP: Contingency Response Plan

✈ CS: Communications Squadron

✈ CWPC: Contingency Wartime Planning Course

C



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

✈ DBA: database administrator

✈ DCG: Disaster Control Group

✈ DEO: Defense Estate Organization

✈ DGN: design (file)

✈ DIN: Do It Now

✈ DoD: Department of Defense

✈ DPS: Disaster Preparedness System

✈ DWG: drawing (file)

✈ DXF: digital exchange format (file)

✈ EA: environmental assessment

✈ ECAMP: Environmental Compliance Assessment and

Management Program

✈ EIAP: Environmental Impact Assessment Process

✈ EIDE: enhanced integrated drive electronics

✈ EIS: Emergency Information System

✈ EPC: Environmental Protection Committee

✈ ESRI: Environmental Systems Research Institute

✈ FAS: Fuels Automated System

✈ FD: Fire Department

✈ FGS: Final Governing Standards

✈ FID: Facility Inspection Database

✈ FIM: facility investment metric

✈ FSD: Fire Safety Deficiency

✈ FTP: File Transfer Protocol

✈ FUS: Facility Utilization Survey

D

E

F


RA

F M

ilden

hal

l, E

ng

lan

d

✈ GB: gigabyte

✈ GDS: brand name for GIS software package

✈ GDSS: Global Decision Support System

✈ GIS: geographic information system

✈ GPS: global positioning system

✈ GSU: geographically separated units

✈ GUI: graphical user interface

✈ Hazmat: hazardous materials

✈ HQ AMC: Headquarters�Air Mobility Command

✈ HVAC: heating, ventilation, air conditioning

✈ IBDS: inhabited building distances

✈ IRAS/C: Intergraph Corporation raster data software

✈ I-PLOT: Intergraph enhanced plotting software for MicroStation

output

✈ IS: information system

✈ IWIMS: Interim Work Information Management System

✈ JSIIDS: Joint Services Interior Intrusion Detection System

✈ KB: kilobyte

✈ KVA: kilovolt

✈ LAN: local area network

✈ LGS: Logistics Supply

✈ LM: Lodging Maintenance

G

H

I

J

K

L



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

✈ MB: megabyte

✈ ME: Maintenance Engineering

✈ MGE: Modular GIS Environment

✈ MHz: megaHertz

✈ MOC: Maintenance Operations Center

✈ MOD: Ministry of Defense (Great Britain)

✈ MS: Microsoft

✈ NATO: North Atlantic Treaty Organization

✈ NOAA: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

✈ NOS: network operating system

✈ OEA: Open Enforcement Action

✈ OG: Operations Group

✈ OPS: Operations

✈ OS: operating system

✈ OS: Ordnance Survey

✈ PC: personal computer

✈ PCB: polychlorinated biphenyl

✈ PCMS: Project Control Management System

✈ POC: point of contact

✈ POL: petroleum, oil, and lubricants

✈ PPR: Flight Operations Parking Plan

✈ Q/D: quantity/distance (in reference to Explosive Safety Clear

Zones)

M

N

O

P

Q


RA

F M

ilden

hal

l, E

ng

lan

d

✈ Radhaz: radio hazard

✈ RAF: Royal Air Force

✈ RAFM: Royal Air Force Mildenhall

✈ RAM: random access memory

✈ RDBMS: relational database management system

✈ RTK: real-time kinematic

✈ SCSI: small computer system interface

✈ SCXC: Command Squadron LAN Shop

✈ SCSX: Command Squadron LAN Shop

✈ SF: Security Forces

✈ SOE: standards of excellence

✈ SOG: Special Operations Group

✈ SPAS: Security Police Automated System

✈ SPTG: 100 ARW Support Group

✈ SRC: Survival Recovery Center

✈ STEP: Survey Tool for Execution Planning

✈ SVGA: Super Video Graphics Adapter

✈ TA: Trans Alert

✈ TDY: Temporary Duty (Assignment)

✈ TERPS: Terminal Instrument Procedures

✈ TSSDS: Tri-Service Spatial Data Standards

✈ TV: television

✈ UK: United Kingdom

✈ USAF: U.S. Air Force

✈ USAFE: U.S. Air Force Europe

R

S

T

U



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

✈ UST: underground storage tank

✈ UXO: unexploded ordinance

✈ VCR: videocasette recorder

✈ VISION: Versatile Information Systems Integrated in Operational

Networks

✈ WIMS: Work Information Management System

✈ WPAFB: Wright-Patterson Air Force Base

✈ XP: Wing Plans

V

W

X



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

Section 12: GIS Cost-Benefit Analysis Paradigm

In this section, one example of a cost-benefit analysis

is given in an information scenario, followed by an

unpublished paper written by Stephen R. Gillespie of

the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This paper

describes a broader scenario for GIS-related

cost-benefit analysis.

A Cost-Benefit Scenario

Where does the time go? For a significant number of

offices at RAF Mildenhall, it goes to finding and

verifying information. In dozens of interviews with

personnel in 20 offices that have a keen interest in

this strategic plan, it became clear that a significant

amount of time is spent gathering information about

the base. Whether the task at hand is planning new

facilities, storing equipment, or allocating space, the

individual charged with the task must locate,

retrieve, investigate, confirm and often reformat

information before he or she can begin the job.

In this example, we can estimate that in each of 10

different organizations at RAF Mildenhall, one

person is responsible for performing the steps

necessary to obtain useable information about the

base. For this example, let�s use a Technical Sergeant,

E-6-level as a minimum, (for the sake of the example,

let�s call him Tsgt. A. F. Blue) who spends an

estimated 30 percent of his allocated hours on the

job simply trying to assemble up-to-date, quality

information.

TSgt. Blue has a total of six years of service to the US

Air Force, and he is now at his fourth assigned base,

RAF Mildenhall. His first three months onbase were

spent learning about who has information he needs,

who is maintaining this information, obtaining the

information and then reformatting it to fit his

specific needs. After his three-month introduction to

the base, he is comfortable with how to find

information he needs, but realizes, since this data is

always changing, that he will have to continually

review information to confirm its content.

At an annual salary, not including his allowance for

housing and subsistence, of approximately $21,360,

about $5,350 has been spent simply for TSgt. Blue to

become familiar with information about the base. He

then spends another 30 percent of his remaining

working hours for the year in an information search,

which costs an additional $4,800. Total spending for

the year to bring TSgt. Blue up to an acceptable level

of information use is $10,150.

Again, for this example, due to constant fluctuations

in manpower we can assume that at least half of the

10 organizations face a similar situation in any given

year. That means a cost of $10,150 multiplied five

times, for a total expenditure of $50,750 per year.

The other five organizations, we assume, have a

knowledgeable TSgt. rather than a newcomer in this

position � but we learned that even after this

individual is familiar with information sources, he or

she continues to spend $6,400 worth of time per year

on information verification and formatting. All told,

RAF Mildenhall organizations shell out at least

$82,750 per year on information research alone. And

this cost is simply for information research; there is

still no real information sharing going on between

organizations to alert one to what another has verified,

modified, or updated and as the data is always changing

the value of the information decreases exponentially after

it has been gathered.

In comparison, the $82,000 now being spent could

be realigned to support effective base information

sharing. And this could be a one-time expense. An

effective way of centralizing information and easily

propagating it to the public is through the use of an

intranet. An intranet graphic user interface (GUI)

gives all users the capability to view, retrieve, and

add information to a centralized collection of data.

The estimated cost to purchase GeoMedia Web Map,

which facilitates the dissemination of mapping

information, is a single purchase of approximately

$20,000. Because servers and an efficient network

infrastructure are already in place, and considering

the excellent support that the 100 CS

12-2 SECTION 12

GIS Cost-Benefit Analysis ParadigmR

AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

Communications Squadron is providing to the

information sharing cause, an addition to each user�s

current computing capability to run the GeoMedia

Web Map GIS application is almost free for each

machine, because it�s based on a viewing tool only.

Application development and yearly maintenance is

required to field a product similar to the GIS

Prototype, this again is a one-time cost that should

not exceed $25-45,000. Other cost-benefit

considerations include:

✈ A centralized, automated information storage

process allows users to access and apply data for

which the 100 CEOM CADD Drafters are

responsible


process allows users to notify the 100 CEOM of

updates or changes that are only found during

field work


process allows users to access, use and possibly

store only the information they need, rather

than maintaining current practices which

require multiple copies for every individual use.


process means that every user accesses the most

up-to-date, consistent information regardless of

the user�s individual needs. If all information is

served to users from one source, everyone has

access to the same reference.


process opens the door to additional uses for

information that are currently impossible or

unseen. This is perhaps the most difficult dollar

value to quantify and yet perhaps the biggest

benefit of all�finding new ways to use existing

data to meet challenges that now seem

insurmountable.

This scenario is a very simple example of cost-benefit

analysis, considering only one aspect of information

use�the initial research and approval to apply what

is available�and estimating the actual cost of

current practice. Considering that map updates are

ongoing with or without a new system, and that

many of the applications needed to effectively share

and use information are one-time costs, the

following paper presents a relevant a model that has

been proposed to consider GIS implementation cost-

benefit comparisons in almost any scenario.

A Model Approach to Estimating GISBenefits, by Stephen R. Gillespie

Abstract

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has developed a model

to predict the benefits of using geographic information

system (GIS) technology. The USGS research focuses on

the complexity of an application as the key factor

influencing the level of benefits. Three different aspects of

complexity are input to a pair of multiple regression

equations. The equations explain from ½ to ¾ of the

measured variation in GIS benefits, and present a

powerful tool for improving the quality of GIS cost/benefit

studies.

Paper

All current users and potential future users of GIS

technology must deal with the issue of the costs and

benefits of their activities. The only justification for

any organization�s expenditures on digital data is

that the data�s benefits exceed their cost.

Nonetheless, accurate data on benefits generated by

GIS technology are rare.

The 1994 Urban and Regional Information Systems

Association (URISA) conference dramatically

illustrates that the GIS user community recognizes

both the importance and the current paucity of

benefits information. The theme of the conference

was �Integrating Information and Technology: IT

Makes $ense� (Tsui 1994). By this, the conference

coordinators meant that the technology must be

cost-effective. Despite this stated objective, GIS

management consultant Rebecca Somers, reviewing

the conference, wrote, �A notable absence was that of

any real discussion about the actual costs and

benefits of GIS ... conference attendees would expect



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

a range of presentations presenting real figures and

results, and perhaps even some guidelines -

something that we desperately need, but the dearth

of information in this area persists� (Somers 1994).

The lack of reliable benefit estimates can have a real

cost. Failure to quantify potential benefits can lead to

undervaluing GIS technology in cost/benefits studies

designed to justify its implementation or expansion.

Too conservative an estimate of net benefits can

cause the delay or cancellation of investment in a

technology that might be seen to be highly cost-

effective if benefits were measured more thoroughly.

The problem is not fundamentally a theoretic one.

The field of the economics of information contains

an extensive literature on the theoretical valuation

of non-priced and non-priceable goods. USGS

research published in the Fall 1994 URISA Journal

(Gillespie 1994) demonstrates that there are practical

techniques for measuring benefits that might

initially appear to be nonquantifiable. The real

difficulty in applying such techniques to improve

benefit measurement is that they can be time-

consuming and expensive. Converting from

qualitative to quantitative benefit measurement can

easily double or triple the cost of a cost/benefit study.

It would be very useful to have a relatively quick and

inexpensive method for making ballpark estimates of

the likely benefits an organization would gain from

the use of GIS technology.

One way to avoid the expensive process of directly

measuring the benefits of using GIS is to identify

factors that contribute to a successful GIS

application. Numerous published studies address the

question of how to successfully implement GIS in an

organization. They concentrate on organizational

factors such as �selling� the technology to high-level

management, involvement of users, design of

effective pilot projects, and consensual creation of a

vision for the organization�s GIS (Anderson 1992).

Less common is the identification of factors that

influence the success of particular GIS applications.

Aronoff (1989) discusses how the usefulness of

existing spatial data (factors such as correctness,

comparability, and consistency) affects the success of

GIS. The more useful the existing data, the greater

the likelihood that GIS can be successfully used. The

causative link is cost avoidance; that is, when the

existing data are good, the user does not have to

spend as much to provide good data input for the

GIS. Ripple (1987) identifies the rate of change of

existing data and the likelihood of legal challenges

to decisions as important factors. The faster the rate

of change, the greater the value of GIS; the value

stemming from the relative ease of updating

computer files. The greater the likelihood of legal

challenge, the greater the value of GIS; the value

coming from the appearance of professionalism and

rigor of GIS outputs. The Bureau of Indian Affairs

(1988) identifies the existence of repetitive work as a

key to a successful GIS application.

USGS research extends this early work by creating

and applying a comprehensive framework for

analysis of the factors that influence the value of GIS

technology for particular applications. The resulting

model greatly simplifies the task of quantifying

benefits.

General Framework for GIS Benefits

The benefits available from the use of GIS

technology can be classified into two broad

categories; efficiency benefits and effectiveness

benefits. Efficiency benefits result when a GIS is used

to do a task previously done without a GIS; the same

quality of output is produced, but at lower cost. For

example, cut and fill calculations can be made by

applying planimetric techniques to contour lines on

a graphic map, or by manipulating digital elevation

data in a GIS. Both methods yield the same results,

but a GIS is much faster and easier.

Effectiveness benefits result when a GIS is used to

improve the quality of a current output, or to

produce an output not previously available; the GIS

is used to do something that could not or would not

be done without it. For example, a GIS can quickly

and easily produce maps showing how the proposed

route for a new road would impact a series of

environmentally sensitive resources. Such maps

12-4 SECTION 12


AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

could be manually drafted, but the process would be

so expensive that they probably would not be

prepared. A GIS can also overlay a large number of

separate environmental themes and calculate an

overall impact. When there are more than just a few

overlays, this is a task that is simply not feasible using

non-GIS techniques.

The level of benefits realized when using GIS to run

an application is determined by comparing the cost

of using the GIS method to the cost of using the

non-GIS method, and by comparing the value of the

outputs produced by the two methods.

Benefits of GIS = (Value of outputGIS - Value of

outputNON-GIS) + (CostNON-GIS - CostGIS)

Pure efficiency benefits and pure effectiveness

benefits can be seen as special cases of this general

formula. When the GIS outputs are equivalent to the

non-GIS outputs, the first term vanishes, leaving

Benefits = CostNON-GIS - CostGIS, or pure efficiency

benefits. When the costs of the two methods are the

same, the second term vanishes, leaving Benefits =

(Value of outputGIS - Value of outputNON-GIS), or pure

effectiveness benefits.

The general formula shows why benefit

measurement of a proposed use of GIS is expensive.

Of the four terms in the formula, CostNON-GIS is the

only one for which a government agency is likely to

have reasonably accurate information. Estimation of

CostGIS could require an extensive pilot test.

Estimation of the value of outputs requires

identification of users and uses of the outputs,

impacts of changes in outputs on the users and uses,

and dollar valuations of the impacts; none of which

is likely to be easy. Faced with such a daunting task, it

is not surprising that quantitative measurement of

GIS benefits is so rare.

Factors Influencing Level of GIS Benefits

The USGS research focuses on the complexity of an

application as the key factor influencing the level of

benefits realized from the application of GIS

technology. There are a variety of different aspects to

the complexity of an application.

✈ Input complexity concerns the data themes

needed to perform the application. It involves

such things as the number and diversity of data

themes, the total volume of input data, and the

areal extent of the application.

✈ Analysis complexity concerns how the data

themes are manipulated inside the application.

It involves such things as the maximum number

of concurrent overlays, the number of steps in

the analysis, the number of intermediate data

themes created, and the number of potential

interactions between data themes.

✈ Output complexity concerns the products of the

application. It involves such things as the

number of distinct uses for the outputs, and the

likelihood that the outputs will be used in

adversarial hearings.

Each complexity factor can be expected to influence

the level of efficiency and effectiveness benefits in a

predictable way.

Among the measures for input complexity, both the

areal extent of the application and the volume of

input data are expected to be positively related to the

level of efficiency benefits. All other things being

equal, the larger the study area or the greater the

amount of physical data, the greater the manual

inputs required. Greater manual inputs implies a

larger potential for efficiency benefits. Both also are

expected to be positively related to the level of

effectiveness benefits. All other things being equal,

the larger the study area, the greater the value of

outputs. A greater volume of input data implies a

larger information content in the outputs. Greater

value of outputs implies a larger potential for


In fact, it is expected that both of these input

complexity measures would have a log linear

relationship to the level of GIS benefits. This is

because there are economies of scale in dealing with

inputs, so that a doubling of the volume of inputs

less than doubles the complexity of the application.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

There are two general types of economies of scale

that operate with input complexity. Both types are

illustrated by an application to find an optimal

route.

For example, assume it is desired to find the best

route for shipping something from point A to point

B. The road network would be an input to this

application. The complexity of the input would be

affected by the level of detail sought about the road

network. If only interstate highways are relevant to

the analysis, then the input is not very complex. As

more levels of detail are needed (for example,

primary roads, secondary roads, unpaved roads) the

input becomes more complex. However, the

complexity does not increase as quickly as does the

volume of input data. There may be 5 times as many

miles of secondary roads as primary roads, but their

inclusion only raises the input complexity by one

level.

Another economy of scale comes about because

much input data is not relevant to the problem. For

example, most secondary roads are clearly not on the

optimal route and can quickly be eliminated from

further consideration. Adding the entire secondary

road network could double or triple the volume of

input data, but probably would add only slightly to

the volume that must be seriously considered.

Among the measures for analysis complexity, both

the number of concurrent overlays and the number

of potential interactions between data themes are

expected to be positively related to the level of

benefits. All other things being equal, the greater the

number of themes overlaid, the greater the manual

inputs required, and the larger the potential for

efficiency benefits. Similarly, the greater the

information content in the outputs, and the larger

the potential for effectiveness benefits.

The number of data themes overlaid is expected to

have a linear relationship with the level of efficiency

benefits. There are no economies of scale with

analysis complexity. However, it is expected to have a

curvilinear relationship to the level of effectiveness

benefits. It is true that diminishing returns apply to

the simple addition of data themes. For example,

assume it is desired to predict the effect on an

endangered species of expanding logging in a

national forest. Expanded logging would create a

variety of environmental stresses that could affect

the endangered species. To find the single most

dangerous stress, one would examine each stress

independently. As more and more separate stresses

are examined, diminishing returns would quickly set

in.

However, the concurrent examination of multiple

data themes also involves the ever increasing

complexity of interaction effects. Interaction effects

can be very important. For example, perhaps no one

environmental stress would have a serious effect on

the endangered species, but the cumulative effect of

many stresses would be fatal. The interaction effects

created as the number of themes overlaid increases

could make a major contribution to the value of the

output. The number of interactions between data

themes increases geometrically as the number of data

themes increases arithmetically.

The measures for output complexity are expected to

have a linear relationship to the level of both

efficiency benefits and effectiveness benefits. There

are no economies of scale with these measures.

Increasing any of them is likely to result in a

proportionate increase in the complexity of the

application. Likewise, there are no significant

diminishing returns to the number of different uses

for the output or to the probability of the output

being used in adversarial hearings. Increasing either

of these measures is likely to result in a proportionate

increase in the value of the output.

It is also likely that there are interaction effects

between the different aspects of complexity. An

application�s overall complexity is more than just the

sum of its input, analysis, and output complexity;

they are more likely to be multiplicative that

additive. The impact of overall complexity on the

level of GIS benefits is expected to vary depending

on the relative strengths of the three different

aspects of complexity.

12-6 SECTION 12


AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

A Model to Estimate Benefits

The USGS has linked the theoretical influence of

complexity factors to the general framework for GIS

benefits to produce a quantitative model for

estimating GIS benefits. The model is specified as a

pair of ordinary least squares multiple regression

equations. Input to the model is provided by a series

of 62 cost/benefit studies of Federal GIS applications

conducted by the USGS in 1990 and 1991 (Gillespie

1991). The model estimates efficiency and

effectiveness benefits independently.

Pure effectiveness benefits are estimated by the

equation:

LT = 3.752 + 0.673 INPLEX1 + 0.045 INTERACT +

0.429 OUTPLEX + 3.147 SMALL + residual

(3.5) (5.7) (1.6)

(2.3) (2.8)

where:

✈ LT = Natural log of pure effectiveness benefits

✈ INPLEX1 = Measure of input complexity

✈ INTERACT = Measure of analysis complexity

✈ OUTPLEX = Measure of output complexity

✈ SMALL = Dummy variable reflecting overall

complexity of application

The equation has an R2 of 0.592, an F value of 11.250,

and is based on 36 observations. T statistics are in

parentheses below each coefficient.

The R2 value means that the equation explains about

three-fifths of the measured variation in the level of

effectiveness benefits across the 36 applications

studied. The F statistic tests the hypothesis that all of

the coefficients except the intercept are zero. There is

less than one chance in 10,000 of obtaining an F

value this high if all of the coefficients are zero. The t

statistics test if each coefficient individually is equal

to zero. All of the variables except INTERACT are

significant at the 99% confidence level. This means

that there is less than 1 chance in 100 that the

coefficient is zero. INTERACT is significant at the

80% level.

The equation predicts the natural log of pure

effectiveness benefits. The use of the log form implies

that unit changes in the independent variables cause

percent changes in the level of effectiveness benefits.

This is what is expected. For example, consider the

effect of a one unit increase in the output complexity

factor of number of distinct uses. The level of

effectiveness benefits increases by the value of the

outputs to the new class of users. Lacking other

information the best estimate of the value to the new

class of users is the mean value to the previous classes

of users. The increase in the level of effectiveness

benefits depends on the previous level; the increase

is a constant percentage, not a constant dollar

amount. That is, the marginal effect of each of the

independent variables on the dollar amount of

effectiveness benefits increases with the level of


The dollar estimate of pure effectiveness benefits is

found by taking the antilog. For example:

✈ When LT = 5, the dollar value = $148;

✈ When LT = 7, the dollar value = $1,097;

✈ When LT = 9, the dollar value = $8,103.

If the effectiveness benefits are not pure (that is, if

CostGIS CostNON-GIS), then the difference between

CostGIS and CostNON-GIS must be subtracted from the

estimated total. For example, if estimated pure

effectiveness benefits = $5,000, CostGIS = $2,000, and

CostNON-GIS = $500, then estimated net effectiveness

benefits are $5,000 - ($2,000 - $500) = $3,500.

Pure efficiency benefits are estimated by the

equation:

RATIO = 0.477 + 0.100 INPLEX2 - 0.001

INTERACT + 0.051 OUTPLEX + 0.377 SMALL

(7.9) (6.5)

(-0.4) (4.3)

+ 0.232 COST - 0.186 LAND + residual

(6.2) (4.4)

(-4.1)



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

where

✈ RATIO = Ratio of efficiency benefits to manual

cost

✈ INPLEX2 = Measure of input complexity

✈ INTERACT = Measure of analysis complexity

✈ OUTPLEX = Measure of output complexity

✈ SMALL = Dummy variable reflecting overall

complexity of application

✈ COST = Dummy variable reflecting cost of

performing application with manual methods

✈ LAND = Dummy variable reflecting subject area

of application

The equation has an R2 of 0.742, an F value of 11.531,

and is based on 31 observations. T statistics are in

parentheses below each coefficient. The equation

explains about three-quarters of the measured

variation in the ratio of efficiency benefits to manual

cost across the 31 applications studied.

The efficiency equation has some structural

differences from the effectiveness equation. Rather

than estimating the absolute level of efficiency

benefits, the equation estimates the fraction of the

manual cost of running the application that is saved

by the use of GIS technology. Because the manual

cost restricts the efficiency benefits to a maximum

value, manual cost is an important factor to include

in any model. Incorporating the manual cost into

the dependent variable eliminates the need to

include it as an independent variable. This brings the

influences of the other variables into clearer view.

The two additional dummy variables are included

because of the above change in the dependent

variable. COST flags applications that are neither

very expensive nor very inexpensive to run

manually. It is expected that applications in the mid-

range of manual cost will tend to save a larger

percentage of their manual cost than would be

estimated solely on the basis of the values of the

other variables. This is due to the frequency with

which this type of application is run; more expensive

applications tend to be run less frequently. An

agency wouldn�t have to save a very large percentage

of the manual cost of a less expensive application to

make it valuable to use GIS. Such applications are

run very frequently, and the sheer volume makes the

total efficiency benefits large. An agency wouldn�t

have to save a very large percentage of the manual

cost of a very expensive application to make it

valuable to use GIS. Such applications are so

expensive that the efficiency benefits are large in

absolute terms anyway. However, an agency does

have to save a large percentage of the manual cost of

a moderately expensive application to make it

valuable to use GIS. Such applications can�t be

justified on the basis of volume (because they aren�t

run very frequently), nor on the basis of large

absolute savings (because the manual costs are not

extremely large), and so require a larger percentage of

savings.

LAND flags applications primarily concerned with

the economic value of the land (for example,

forestry, soils, water resources) rather than with the

land as the location of other human activity (for

example, transportation, emergency preparedness,

urban planning). It is expected that applications

concerned with the economic value of the land will

tend to save a smaller percentage of their manual

cost than would be estimated solely on the basis of

the values of the other variables. This is because

LAND applications are more expensive to run (both

manually and with GIS) than are NON-LAND

applications. LAND applications tend to be more

expensive to run because they are more likely to

involve continuous variables (for example, soil

conditions change incrementally over a geographic

area), while NON-LAND applications are more likely

to involve discrete variables (for example, political

units change abruptly at defined boundaries). The

fuzziness of continuous variables can be expected to

increase the difficulty of both processing and

analysis, and so raise the cost of running an

application. The higher level of both types of cost

reduces the ratio of efficiency benefits to manual

cost.

12-8 SECTION 12


AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

All of the variables are significant at the 99% level

except for INTERACT. The low significance (and

negative coefficient) for INTERACT is also due to

estimating the fraction of savings from GIS. Because

a GIS can handle additional concurrent overlays very

easily, it was expected that CostGIS would increase

very little when analysis complexity increased. This

in turn would lead to an increase in the fraction of

the manual cost saved by the use of GIS. The

equation contradicts this expectation. It appears that

there is a significant increase in CostGIS associated

with an increase in analysis complexity. The

explanation for this is probably that, even though

the marginal cost of physically overlaying another

data theme is trivial with a GIS, the marginal cost of

interpreting the results is not trivial. Whether the

overlays are done manually or with a GIS, it is

considerably more difficult to interpret the results of

overlaying a larger number of themes.

This does not mean that a GIS is not valuable for

handling increased analysis complexity; all other

things being equal, the level of efficiency benefits

will increase when the analysis complexity of the

application increases. However, it does make the

effect of increased analysis complexity on the ratio of

efficiency benefits to manual cost indeterminate.

That is, there is no firm theoretical expectation as to

the direction of the effect; the direction becomes an

empirical question.

The dollar estimate of pure efficiency benefits is

found by multiplying the estimated ratio times the

manual cost of running the application. For

example:

✈ When RATIO = 75.0 and CostNON-GIS = $1,000, the

dollar value = $750;

✈ When RATIO = 80.0 and CostNON-GIS = $200, the

dollar value = $160.

When an application generates both effectiveness

benefits and efficiency benefits, then the estimate of

GIS benefits is the sum of the estimates from the two

equations.

How to Use the Model

The GIS benefits estimation model can be a powerful

tool for improving GIS cost/benefit studies. The

model can produce reasonable estimates of the likely

level of benefits for a fraction of the cost of direct

benefit measurement. There are 10 steps to follow.

1. Identify the different types of applications that

will be run using GIS.

For each type of GIS application:

2. Identify the major source of benefits.

✈ Efficiency benefits: that is, lower cost to run

the application, or

✈ Effectiveness benefits: that is, higher value

output from the application, or

✈ Both types of benefits are important.

3. Estimate how frequently the application will be

run.

For each application where efficiency benefits are

expected to be important:

4. Estimate the information needed to run the

equation.

✈ The values of the complexity variables used

in the efficiency equation. Note: details on

the construction of these variables are

available from the author on request.

✈ The cost of running the application using

the existing (non-GIS) method.

5. Enter the estimated values for the variables into

the equation. The result is an estimate of the

fraction of CostNON-GIS that will be saved by the

use of GIS technology.

6. Convert the fraction to dollars, and aggregate

across applications.

✈ Multiply the fraction by the estimated

manual cost. The result is an estimate of GIS

efficiency benefits for running the

application.



AF M

ilden

hall, En

glan

d

✈ Multiply the estimated efficiency benefits

times the frequency with which the

application will be run. The result is total

efficiency savings for the application.

✈ Sum these totals across all efficiency

applications.

✈ The result is total efficiency benefits for the

use of GIS technology.

For each application where effectiveness benefits are

expected to be important:

7. Estimate the information needed to run the

equation.

✈ The values of the complexity variables used

in the effectiveness equation.

✈ If it is more expensive to run the application

using GIS, the amount by which CostGIS is

greater than CostNON-GIS.

8. Enter the estimated values for the variables into

the equation. The result is an estimate of the

natural log of the dollar value of the new or

improved outputs the GIS will produce.

9. Convert the estimate to dollars, and aggregate

across applications.

✈ Take the antilog of the estimated natural

log. The result is the dollar value of pure

effectiveness benefits for running the

application.

✈ Subtract the excess of CostGIS over CostNON-GIS.

The result is the net effectiveness benefits

for running the application.

✈ Multiply the net effectiveness benefits times

the frequency with which the application

will be run. The result is total net

effectiveness benefits for the application.

✈ Sum these totals across all effectiveness

applications. The result is total effectiveness

benefits for the use of GIS technology.

10. Verify the reasonableness of the benefit

estimates by selecting a small number of

applications and performing a traditional

benefit measurement on them.

The 10-step process produces a suite of outputs

which together tell a compelling story about the

potential value of GIS technology.

✈ Quantitative estimates of GIS benefits.

Impressive on their own, they can be combined

with cost data to produce cost/benefit ratios, net

present values, internal rates of return, and

project breakeven dates.

✈ Case studies of selected applications. These

demonstrate in concrete terms that the

estimated benefits are real.

✈ Ratio of effectiveness to efficiency benefits. This

dramatically demonstrates where the value of

GIS truly lies. Typically the ratio will be large,

making it clear that GIS is an enabling

technology; primarily important because it

helps agencies work better, not because it helps

them work cheaper.

Conclusion

The general framework for GIS benefits is broad

enough to support many different models for

estimating GIS benefits. The USGS tactic of

concentrating on complexity factors is not the only

possible approach, but it has proven to be a fruitful

one. Within the broad categories of input, analysis,

and output complexity, there is room for much

experimentation concerning which variable to

include and how to combine them. The specific

forms of the complexity variable used in the USGS

model work well for the particular set of highly

diverse Federal GIS applications studied. Alternative

formulations of the variables might be more

appropriate for specific types of applications or for

applications run by non-Federal agencies. There is

much useful work still to be done. The USGS research

provides a firm foundation upon which to build a

better knowledge of where and why GIS technology

is valuable.

12-10 SECTION 12


AF

Mild

enh

all,

En

gla

nd

References

Anderson, Carrie S. 1992. �GIS Development Process:

A Proactive Approach to the Introduction of GIS

Technology.� GIS/LIS Proceedings. pp. 1-10.

Aronoff, Stan. 1989. Geographic Information Systems: A

Management Perspective. WDL Publications, Ottawa,

Canada.

Bureau of Indian Affairs. 1988. Final Report on Cost

and Benefit Analysis of Geographic Information System

Implementation to Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Gillespie, S. 1991. �Measuring the Benefits of GIS

Use.� Technical Papers, 1991 ACSM-ASPRS Fall

Convention, pp. 84-94.

Gillespie, S. 1994. �Measuring The Benefits of GIS

Use: Two Transportation Case Studies.� URISA

Journal, 6:2, pp. 62-67.

Ripple, William J., editor. 1987. Geographic

Information Systems For Resource Management.

American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote

Sensing and American Congress on Surveying and

Mapping.

Somers, Rebecca. 1994. �URISA �94: Trying To Keep

Up.� GeoInfoSystems, October 1994, pp. 20-22.

Tsui, Mary. 1994. �URISA �94: A Conference

Overview.� GeoInfoSystems, July 1994, pp. 42-45.

Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence

Brooks Air Force Base, Texas

GIS/Data Implementation Strategic PlanThe Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE) has...

Documents

Transcript of GIS/Data Implementation Strategic PlanThe Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE) has...