1. Association of Defense Communities Panel Overview of a Three Part Discussion in Partnerships June 12, 2013

2. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 1 1 Discussion Outline  Session Description  Session Speakers  Legislation Overview  Air Force Community Partnership Program  Air Force Community Partnerships Program and Tinker AFB  Army’s Privatization and Partnerships  Congressional Intent of Legislation  Open Discussion

3. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 2 2 Session Speaker Description  Jennifer Curtin, Senior Associate, Booz Allen Hamilton  Mr. Steven Zander, Program Director, Air Force Community Partnership Program, Office of The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Installations, Environment and Logistics  Tim Lyon, Assistant City Manager, Midwest City, OK  Mr. Ivan Bolden, Chief, Army’s Privatization and Partnerships, Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management  Ms. Rochelle Dornatt, Office of Representative Sam Farr  Ms. Susan Morris, Principal, Booz Allen Hamilton

4. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 3 3 Session Description  This primer will consist of three sessions:  Legislative Authorities  Success and Roadblocks  Requirements and Needs  The session will end with open discussion between the panel members and attendees

5. Ms. Jennifer Curtin, Senior Associate, Booz Allen Hamilton – Section 331 Legislation Description and Discussion June 12, 2013

6. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 5 5 Partnering Scope  What is the need?  Who are the players?  Federal Government  State Government  Local Government  Economic Development Groups  Industry  Utilities  Higher Education  Others  Facilities  Land Use  Utilities/Energy  Emergency Services  Environmental  Transportation  Education  Workforce  Others Potential Functional Areas Potential Stakeholder Groups  Legal Authorities  Relationships  What are the tools?

7. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 6 6 Defense Legal Authorities for Partnerships  Energy (10 USC 2913)  Housing (10 USC 2872)  Utilities (10 USC 2688)  Encroachment Prevention/Conservation (10 USC 2684/94)  Commercial Leasing (10 USC 2667)  Science Education/Technology (10 USC 2194)  Testing and Evaluation (10 USC 2681)  Property Exchange Authority (10 USC 18233)  Municipal Services/CA only (FY’04 NDAA)

8. 7 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 7 NDAA FY13 - Section 331  Enacted January 10, 2013  Intergovernmental support agreements with State and local governments: 10 USC 2336  In General: (1) The Secretary concerned may enter into an intergovernmental support agreement with a State or local government to provide, receive, or share installation-support services if the Secretary determines that the agreement will serve the best interests of the department by enhancing mission effectiveness or creating efficiencies or economies of scale, including by reducing costs.  May be entered into on a sole-source basis  May be for a term not to exceed five years  Installation support services are those service typically provided by local government for its own needs.  These agreements shall not be used to circumvent A-76 requirements for competition.

9. Mr. Steve Zander, Program Director, Air Force Community Partnership Program – Air Force Community Partnership Program June 12, 2013

10. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 9 9

11. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 10 10 Shared Environment  Reduced budgets & fiscal challenges  Manpower cuts; hiring freezes; realignments; furloughs?  Force structure changes and defense industry reductions  Innovative partnerships—sparked by new legislation  Need to make “Every Dollar Count,” provide quality services, allocate risk, share value This is NOT business as usual

12. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 11 11 Vision and Goals AF and Local Community Leadership is key! Bring AF leadership and resource support as Installation and Community leaders develop, prioritize and implement community partnership initiatives Practice the “Art of the Possible” Identify ways to get to “Yes” by identifying resource requirements: Time, Money, Manpower, Authority

13. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 12 12 Possible Stakeholders  Local, State & Federal Governments (City Managers, Emergency Management, and Public Works)  Regional Planning Organizations  Key Tenant Organizations  Economic Development Organizations  Educators and University Organizations  Non-Governmental Organizations  Conservation Organizations  Union Representatives  Utility Companies  Community Thought Leaders (e.g., Community Alliances, Chambers of Commerce)  Non-Profits  Private sector experts (as appropriate)

14. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 13 13 Potential Cross-Functional Initiatives  Prisoner Detention  Shared use Firing Ranges  Cooperative Police Training  Many of the AF Services provided Airmen support programs:  Youth Programs  Lodging  Community Educational Center near front gate  Waste Management/Recycling  Snow removal  Cooperative Fire Training/Support  Chaplain Programs  Pharmacy  Data Center Training/Cable Maintenance  Expand bus system  Airport Operations and Maintenance  University training of critical need interns  Strategic Sourcing  Sharing of Security intelligence

15. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 14 14 AF Community Partnership Process The AF Community Partnership Process is simple:  Provide a Partnership “Brokering Team” when Installation and Community Leaders commit to using the AF process  Schedule a series of 6 meetings that enable identifying potential partnership initiatives—this series of meetings helps identify potential initiatives that address mutual need and capacities  Once initiatives are “fleshed-out” in adequate detail, bring in experts to help define the way forward—this will help drive initiative priority  By the time of the Table Top Exercise, identify exactly what resources are required, when resources will be needed, and who programs The process is simple, but gaining efficiency requires hard work

16. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 15 15 Questions?

17. Mr. Tim Lyon, Assistant City Manager, Midwest City, OK and Tinker AFB – P4 – Section 331 Partnership Projects June 12, 2013

18. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 17 17 Opportunities “Not Business as Usual”  Jail Services - Signed  Juvenile Services - Signed  Pavements  Shooting Range  Hotel Billeting/Officer’s Club Refuse Collection a) City Sanitation Dept. b) Efficiency - 20% capacity c) Energy - CNG d) Savings $$$

19. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 18 18 Obstacles – “Not just challenging the status quo but CHANGING the status quo”  Conflicting initiatives, FAR versus Section 331?  Small Business & 8A Contract  Contracting Office  Budget versus Cost Accounting  Costing Calculations/Methodology  Capital Purchases in excess of five (5) years

20. 19 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 19 Conclusion - Requirements Leadership : Base and Community What can we do as a community to increase “our” military asset? Tim Lyon Assistant City Manager of Administration City of Midwest City, OK 405-739-1201

21. Mr. Ivan Bolden, Chief, Army’s Privatization and Partnerships – Public-Public Partnering June 12, 2013

22. 21 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 21  Phase I: ASA IE&E issues P3 endorsement  Phase II: ACSIM issues an EXORD to ACOMs/DRUs  Three categories of partnership proposals  Quick Win  Moderately complex  Complex  Phase III: ACSIM evaluates universe of P3s and drafts policy  Phase IV: ACSIM issues Army Policy concerning P3 Multi-phased Public-Public Partnership (P3) Strategy

23. 22 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 22  Quick Wins—Delegated to Garrison Commanders  No exchange of funds (barter only)  No conflicts with existing guidance, policy, regulations or laws  Moderately Complex—Delegated to ACOM/DRU HQ  No exchange of funds (barter only)  No conflicts with Army or DoD guidance, policy, regulations or laws  ACOM/DRU has lead to resolve conflicts  Complex---All approval authority initially remains at HQDA  Includes any exchange of funds  Conflicts with current Army or DoD guidance, policy, regulations or laws Phase II: Delegation of Partnership Approval Authority

24. 23 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 23  After 6 and 12 months, OACSIM review portfolio of P3s in concert with Secretariat, ACOMs, DRUs  Detect trends  Ascertain progress  Prepare joint service newsletter on P3 Best Practices  Consider future potential of regional partnerships that could be formed with other Services  Collaborate with other Services as needed to promote regionalization  Evaluate need for in-depth facilitated brainstorming sessions  Establish P3 Working Group to share progress with Defense Support organizations represented on a national basis Phase III: Evaluation of Partnerships

25. 24 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 24  Establish clear definitions  Establish metrics, progress reporting, and oversight process  Possible further delegation of approval authority  Possible addition of dollar threshold values applied to approval levels Phase IV: Issue Army Policy

26. 25 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 25  To accelerate use of P3, will consider maximum delegation of approval authority, as appropriate, and balance with risk  We will maintain close ties with Air Force to share ideas and Lessons Learned  Continued Senior Army Leadership support is needed to ensure maximum advantage is obtained from new Sec 331 authority  If changes in guidance, policy, regulation or law are required, ARSTAF must be open and supportive Summary

27. Ms. Rochelle Dornatt, Office of Representative Sam Farr – Section 331 Legislative Intent June 12, 2013

28. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 27 27 History of the “Monterey Model”  History of the “Monterey Model”  Initial Glitches (firefighters, federal unions)  Renewal of authority, permanently

29. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 28 28 Expanding the Concept to Other Bases  First, reticence to embrace the concept (within DOD and by base commanders)  Then, acceptance of the economic benefits  Finally, finding the right environment for passage (getting the politics right)

30. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 29 29 Congressional Intent Behind the Language  Economic dynamic  Achieving O&M efficiencies  Solidifying and enhancing the base-community relationship

31. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 30 30 Problems with Execution  Sole sourcing  Small business subcontract

32. 2013 ADC DEFENSE COMMUNITIES NATIONAL SUMMIT | PAGE 31 31 Possible Solutions?  DOD clarification  NDAA report language  New legislation

33. Ms. Susan Morris, Booz Allen Hamilton Questions and Answers June 12, 2013