Supersedes: AFI , 26 March Certified by: AF/SG3/5. (Major General Dorothy A. Hogg). Pages: This publication implements Air. ordinate units. It also applies to all Air Reserve Component (ARC) members when performing duty on. ACC installations. Send comments and suggested. and extends the guidance of Air Force Instruction (AFI) , Tobacco Use in The AFI is published word-for-word without editorial review.
|Language:||English, Spanish, German|
|Genre:||Politics & Laws|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration Required]|
AIR FORCE INSTRUCTION to , Air Force Instruction (AFI) , Air Force Lodging Program, AFI AFI PDF - Supersedes AFI, 1 August Pages: 6. Distribution: F. This instruction implements AFPD, Health Promotion, and establishes. AFI outlines policy. The new (updated) USAF Air Force Instruction (AFI) http://www. terney.info
Quantity 4. Type of radioisotope chemical symbol and atomic number, i. Ra 5. Physical form solid, liquid 6. Chemical form 7.
Activity per item in curies 8. Point of Contact Added For liquid waste, do not fill containers more than half full Added The generator will forward this request to the IRSO who will review, approve, and endorse the form.
AFRRAD will provide written disposal instructions to include packaging, labeling, and shipping requirements.
The facility must be an enclosed, covered area that provides enough protection to prevent damage to the package or to the waste itself. The area must have sufficient security to prevent loss or items from being stolen.
Waste comprised of nuclides, having half-lives of less than 65 days, can be held and allowed to decay until it can be deposed of as non-radioactive waste. This must also be approved in the permit.
Areas in which radioactive waste is generated and temporarily stored must be locked whenever unattended for more than 30 minutes.
Most participants supported this approach. And from a public health standpoint they should both be regulated. So I think it would be a positive move. They know the long-term health risks. And if they choose to do it for whatever reason, they choose to do it for whatever reason. Unfortunately, participants minimized the impact by suggesting that while the negative consequences of tobacco use would increase with age, it did not substantially impact young troops.
Officers were generally convinced about the negative impact of tobacco on productivity, with many observing that tobacco users, particularly smokers, take frequent breaks. Their observations are aligned with studies demonstrating that current smokers have lower productivity when measured using indices of absenteeism and presenteeism and that this results in greater costs for employers. Some of those costs were shouldered by the troops themselves, who may devote a large proportion of their pay to tobacco.
However, additional costs were directly borne by the military e.
Aside from policies restricting tobacco use in federal buildings, participants were generally unaware of other military tobacco polices.
Further, most felt that the enforcement of tobacco policy varied considerably from installation to installation, confirming findings reported in previous studies. Participants expressed doubt as to the effectiveness or appropriateness of using policy to reduce tobacco use.
Thus, we have no direct way of examining how tobacco use status may have influenced the perspectives of line commanders. Second, the study was based on a convenience sample of CGSC students based on our target sample size i. Thus, it is not possible to know how well the findings generalize to all Army commanders. However, we believe that the views expressed by interviewees likely reflect the sentiments of future military line command, as CGSC students represent some of the best, and most committed officers.
Third, participants were mid-level commanders; no studies have been done of top military leadership who are in a position to set wide-ranging policy, i. Participants were not persuaded of the physical harms of smoking to young troops. They noted that military personnel often were facing much more immediate threats, which rendered the impact of tobacco use seemingly inconsequential. Many participants were also unconvinced that, whatever the consequences of tobacco use, policy was likely to be effective at reducing it.
Currently, U. Our findings suggest that this approach will likely have only limited impact, because the very real costs to the organization are largely imperceptible to the individuals most likely to be tobacco users: young troops and their immediate supervisors. Given the perception that tobacco is not a significant detriment to the mission or a priority of military command, policy innovation is unlikely to come from mid-level officers such as those interviewed here.
The lack of conviction that policy can be effective also suggests that substantial change must come from senior leadership, including the Secretaries of the services and the Secretary of Defense. The hierarchical nature of the military means that norms and priorities emanate from senior military leadership, through the approval and enforcement of strong tobacco control policy. Thus, an important component of military tobacco control is increasing the visibility of tobacco as a harm to readiness among senior leadership and to provide education on the effective use of tobacco control policy.
Only when senior military leaders see tobacco use as a significant and unnecessary impediment to the military mission and believe that stronger policy can be effective will the goal of a tobacco-free military be reached.
One potentially effective method of raising the visibility of tobacco as a harm to readiness is appealing to military pride: asserting that military personnel do not use addictive substances and do not require them to complete their mission. The military can impose restrictions on its members that would be unacceptable to civilians e. These findings suggest that strong policy that takes advantage of the hierarchical and disciplined nature of the military, along with the support of senior leadership including at those at the service level in the DoD, will be critical to ending tobacco use by U.
However, previous studies have only indirectly ascertained the views of military line commanders about tobacco control policies. This study is the first to directly interview U.
Interviewees were unaware of proximal effects on health and readiness other than lost productivity due to smoke breaks.
Military line commanders expressed concerns about nicotine addiction and the logistics of ensuring that addicted troops had access to tobacco.
Most were unaware of current policies governing prevention, intervention, and product sales. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH or the Food and Drug Administration.
Funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, or interpretation of the data; or preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript. Footnotes Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of the Navy, Department of the Air Force, the Department of Defense, nor the U.
References 1. Report No. Accessed 23 February Health related behaviors survey of active duty military personnel, Bondurant S, Wedge R. Combating tobacco use in military and veteran populations. The association of smoking and the cost of military training. Tob Control. Reported stress and its relationship to tobacco use among United States Military personnel. Mil Med. Benowitz NL. Nicotine Addiction. N Engl J Med. Cigarette smoking and risk of completed suicide: A meta-analysi of prospective cohort studies.
J Psychiatric Res.
Cigarette smoking and suicide: A prospective study of , male active-duty Army soldiers. Am J Epidemiol.