Table 1.1. Tier Waiver Authorities.



Table 1.1. Tier Waiver Authorities.Tier NumberMay be used in publications atIf, Consequence of Non-ComplianceOr,Then, the Waiver Authority is:And Risk is Assumed by the:T-0Any levelDetermined by respective non-AF authority (e.g.Congress, White House, OSD, JS)Examples:a. AFI 51-202,Nonjudicial Punishment, 3.10.Changing Commanders before Nonjudicial Punishment Proceedings are Complete. A member must always be informed of the identity of the commander who will actually make the findings and punishment decisions before a decision is required as to whether to accept nonjudicial punishment or demand court-martial. (T-0).b. AFI 90-201, The Air Force Inspection System, 2.4.1.1. IAW 10 USC § 8583 and AFI 1-2, Commander’s Responsibilities, commanders will conduct Internal Inspections and actively support and participate in External Inspections affecting their unit(s). (T-0).N/AExternal to AF.Requests for waivers are processed through command channels to HAF publication OPR/HAF functional for submission consideration to non-AF authority.N/ATier NumberMay be used in publications atIf, Consequence of Non-ComplianceOr,Then, the Waiver Authority is:And Risk is Assumed by the:T-1Departmental level onlyNon-compliance puts Airmen, commanders, or the USAF strongly at risk of mission or program failure, death, injury, legal jeopardy or fraud, waste or abuse. Examples:a. AFI 90-201, 2.4.1.manders are responsible for ensuring compliance within their units. Commanders will ensure their CCIP focuses on detecting non-compliance with all applicable governing directives and on unit effectiveness in the four MGAs in Figure 2.2.(T-1).b. AFI 33-332, Air Force Privacy and Civil Liberties Program,3.3.11. Periodic Reviews of PIAs (Privacy Impact Assessment). ISO (Information System Owner) and PM (Program Manager) shall review PIAs annually (T-1).Conformity is needed across the Air Force and HAF must be consulted prior to deviationsThe requestors’ MAJCOM/CC (delegable no lower than the appropriate MAJCOM Director, if delegated), with concurrence of the publication’s Approving OfficialFor requests from ANG units, the NGB/CF (delegable no lower than ANGRC/CC , if delegated), with concurrence of the publication’s Approving OfficialFor requests from AF Level FOA or DRU, the appropriate FOA or DRU CC with concurrence of the publication’s Approving Official (processed through the FOA’s or DRU’s parent HAF two-letter)MAJCOMCommander and concurring HAFpublication approving officialTier NumberMay be used in publications atIf, Consequence of Non-ComplianceOr,Then, the Waiver Authority is:And Risk is Assumed by the:T-2Departmental, MAJCOM,and ANG levels onlyNon-compliance may degrade mission or program effectiveness or efficiency and has potential to create moderate risk of mission or program failure, injury, legal jeopardy or fraud, waste or abuse.Examples:a. AFI 90-201, 2.9.1.Gatekeeper. Gatekeepers at all levels must ensure the inspection system is able to independently and efficiently inspect units on behalf of the command chain. (T-2). b. AFI 33-396,Knowledge Management, 4.2.1.1. Focal Point for EIS (Enterprise Information Services) and Collaborative Technologies. For any supported unit, the KMC (Knowledge Management Center) will be the point of contact for EIS, AF Portal, and commercial collaborative products that are not tied to a specific functional community. (T-2).Conformity is needed across the Air Force, but HAF is not needed to be consulted for deviationsThe requestors’ MAJCOM/CC (delegable no lower than the appropriate MAJCOM Director, if delegated)For requests from ANG units, the NGB/CF (delegable no lower than ANGRC/CC or appropriate NGB Director, if delegated)For requests from AF Level FOA or DRU, the appropriate FOA or DRU CCMAJCOMCommander and requestorTier NumberMay be used in publications atIf, Consequence of Non-ComplianceOr,Then, the Waiver Authority is:And Risk is Assumed by the:T-3Departmental, MAJCOM,FOA, and NAF levelsNon-compliance may limit mission or program effectiveness or efficiency and has a relatively remote potential to create risk of mission or program failure, injury, legal jeopardy or fraud, waste or abuse.Examples:a. AFI 90-201, 5.6.2.The Wing CIMB (Commander’s Inspection Management Board) will meet monthly (quarterly for ARC). (T-3).b. AFI 33-396, 4.2.2.7.Apply Continuous Process Improvement (CPI) Principles. The KMC will have foundational training in CPI methodologies, such as AFSO 21 and DoD CPI/Lean Six Sigma (LSS). (T-3).Conformity is needed across the Air Force, but commander’s may decide to deviate from standard practicesRequesting units’ Wing/DRU/FOA/CC(delegabl e no lower than Group/CC or equivalent)Wing, FOA, or DRU CommanderNote:- For purposes of waiver approval authority for units assigned to a combatant command, the Commander Air Force Forces (COMAFFOR) is considered a MAJCOM/CC equivalent.– Tiering is for identifying subordinate level commanders’ authority to approve waivers; do not use a tier number that reflects the same level as the organization that issued the publication. For example, it is redundant to identify a T-3 (Wing/CC) in a Wing publication, given that the default approval authority for the waiver is the Wing/CC since they approved the publication. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download