* Pe HISTORY OF THE AIR FORCE INTELLIGENCE SERVICE 1 JANUARY - 31 DECEMBER 1982 FORT BELVOIR, VIRGINIA VOLUME, NARRATIVE AND APPENDICES ‘4 ©. - se HEADQUARTERS, UNITED STATES AIR FORCE _- (THIS COVER IS UNCLASSIFIED)
HISTORY OF THE AIR FORCE INTELLIGENCE SERVICE 1 January - 31 December 1982 Fort Belvoir, Virginia Voiume I Narrative and Appendices by TSgt Jack L. Krahulec Historical Division f ky : LH. MARTIN Brigadier General, USAF 9 August 1983 HEADQUARTERS, UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
FOREWORD Ten years have passed since the birth of the Air Force Intelligence Service (AFIS) -- years of rapid and drastic change. The world has undergone major changes involving age-old problems such as war, famine and discrimination, as well as new and emerging problems, such as overpopulation, violations of ecological balance, and uncontrolled technological change. But while these years have recorced many tragic events and brought new and crucial problems, they have aiso been a time of tremendous scientific advance. We have come to realize as never before that the kind of future man will rave depends on our actions -- whether by decision or by default. During 1982, the need for increased Air Force Intelligence became evident. The United States was confronted, on the one hand, with the growing military power of the Soviet Union, and on the Other, with increasing turbulence in the developing world. Taken together, these two factors created an environment of resources vulnerability for the United States and other industrialized societies. La Deputy Secretary of Defense Frank C. Carlucci provided a summary Of world situations in a speech to the Senate Subcommittee on Defense Appropriations on 21 April 1982: ..-.Over the last few decades, there has been a significant change in the geostrategic situation. The Soviet Union has succeeded in projecting its power by establishing outposts throughout the world: Da Nang, a former U.S. base is now a Soviet base; Libya, where we once used Wheelus AB, is now an arsenal of Soviet arms; Aden, a former British port, is now a Soviet base; Afghanistan, formerly neutral territory, is now a Soviet occupation zone; and Grenada, formerly.a peaceful island in the Caribbean, has become an air base available to the Soviet Union. Additionally, Soviet use of proxy forces . in Africa, such as East Germans and Cubans, as well as its supplying military equipment to export revolution in Central America, are further evidence of Soviet efforts to disrupt world order. At the same time, the Soviet Union has established a chain of modern air and naval bases in Asia from Siberia to the Mediterranean that provides them a logistics lifeline for power projection that can threaten U.S. and allied interests and affect the balance of global military power. Throughout 1982, AFIS continued to support United States Air Force (USAF) planning and combat operations and responded to changing Air Force intelligence requirements. It provided special {zed services and information to Headquarters USAF and Air Force commanders worldwide by collecting, processing and disseminating intelligence information.
@S I have been very pleased with the progress AFIS has made in all mission areas during 1982. In spite of manning shortages, internal reorganizations and increased taskings and responsibilities, AFIS continued to provide outstanding support to the intelligence community. Repeated successes in operations and support added re- cognition and credibility for AFIS through the national level. This was directly attributed to the dedication, pride and professional ism of our people. This history provides a record of our experiences during the year. WILLIAM B. SHERMAN, Col, USAF Vice Commander
PREFACE = The history of the Air Force Intelligence Service (AFIS) for calendar year 1982 consists of a narrative volume and five volumes of supporting documents. These volumes are on file at the AFIS History Office and the Albert F. Simpson Historical Research Center, Maxwell AFB, Alabama. F—~| Two methods of organization were used in preparing the history. The chapters are functionally grouped with subdivisions by organization. This system allowed broader coverage of all assigned units with minimum repetition and duplication. All units are rep- resented within the history with the exception of AFIS OL-M. Due to the nature of their mission, information on this unit will be covered in the AF/INY history. The history could not have been produced without the kind assistance of numerous individuals and organizations. The narrative benefited from the historical inputs, comments, and suggestions of the AFIS and AFSAC Commanders, Directors and Division Chiefs. Their contributions can be seen in the sources cited. I would like to express appreciation to lr. Grant Hales in the Office of Air Force History for his support, assistance and advice; to Colonel William B. Sherman (AFIS/CV), who supported this project and encouraged its broad publication; to Technical Sergeant Ronald E. LaCoss (AFIS/AC), for his outstanding support in obtaining word-processing time; to Chief Master Sergeant Robert R. O'Toole (AFIS/DA) for his administrative support; Mr. Keith E. Boyce for graphics and cover design; and Major Charles Pugh (AFSAC/CCE) for his outstanding support under short notice. Special acknowledgement is due to Mrs. Kathy Ward (AFIS/HO) for typing the manuscript in its numerous revisions. . Due to the contemporary nature of the history, it is subject to revision as additional information becomes available. Suggestions for improving this and future volumes of the AFIS history are welcome and should be directed to the Office of History, Headquarters Air Force Intelligence Service, Fort Belvoir, Virginia 22060. L Hokey JACK L. KRAHULEC, TSgt, USAF Office of History
TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE ee ee we el SECURITY PAGE . FOREWORD. . 2. 2. ew ewe kk PREFACE . 2. 2. 1 ee te we ee le TABLE OF CONTENTS ~. 2. . . 1 ww we ee LIST OF TABLES . 2. 2. we ww eke le CHRONOLOGY . . . . we ee ee CHAPTER I - MISSION, RESOURCES AND SUPPORT ACTIVITIES . Mission, Organization and Command. . . . Mission , . Organization . . . .. 6... Command. . . . . .. Resources . . . . 2. 2. 2+ 2 2. we Manpower . - 8 Mission and Resources . 8 Operations . . . ... Special Problems . . . . . Personnel . . . ee Mission and Resources Civilian Personnel . Training, Education and Career “Development Military Personnel Resources . Monetary . a Comptroller : ts oe el Accounting and Finance oo. Management Analysis . Budget . Materiel ee eee ee Support Activities ... ee es Headquarters Squadron Section oe ew ee Administration . . . . . . 6. ee Inspector General oe ee lel Plans Division . . . . 2... Public Affairs - ee le le ll CHAPTER IJ - INTELLIGENCE SUPPORT - ee ee lt Operational Intelligence . . . . . . ... Significant Management Issues . . Special Studies . Special Activity Applications ‘Group Intelligence Research . ii ili vii xi WW Onna & eee 3 DO Rs bt ee eS O00 COWMM UTre rh M PO AD DD Ww WwW Ww Ww AO iw wn © 41 vii
Photo Research . . Aerospace Intelligence Target Intelligence . . Concepts and Applications. . Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy . Intelligence Data Management . . Security and Communications Management . Collateral Security. . . . . Personnel Security. . . . . Security Management . . . Special Security . . . . CHAPTER III - INTELLIGENCE PROGRAMS  . Intelligence Reserve Forces . Mission and Resources . Mission. . . . Organization . . . Budget Operations and Readiness . Annual and Special Tours Workshops Mobilization Planning and Readiness. . Establishment of Detached Training Sites . Intelligence Support Projects Training Programs : Personnel and Administrative Management . . Assignment and Recruiting . Personnel Security . Special Actions and Records Administrative Management . Attache Affairs . . Mission and Resources . Significant Factors Operations and Training Support On Station Incidents On Station : Escape, Evasion and Prisoner of War - Mission and Resources . Organization and Mission Budget Status Limiting Factors . Code of Conduct and SERE . Code of Conduct . Survival, Evasion, Resistance and 1 Escape (SERE). Defense Support Programs . . Soviet Affairs . . Mission and Organization : Literature Research Soviet Awareness Special Problems viii
Operating Locations . OL-AF OL-Ki OL-F Air Force Special Activities Center (AFSAC) Mission and Resources . . . Mission and Organization Significant Projects Special Problem Areas Mission and Resources Operations . Mission and "Resources : tool : Operational and Functional “Activities . Plans, Resources and + Support rr Operations . . Limiting Factors . . .. . FOOTNOTES APPENDICES Appendix |] - Lineage a and “Honors Data Appendix II - Roster of Key Personnel . . Appendix III - Authorized and Assigned Strength . Appendix IV - List of Plans Reviewed/Revised During CY 82 (AFIS/LG) Appendix V - List of Agreements Reviewed/Revised in CY 82 (AFIS/LG) Appendix VI - List of AFIS Vehicles . . Appendix VII - List of Significant Publ ications and Events (AFIS/XP) . Appendix VIII - AFIS/INOH Research Support Appendix IX - Intelligence Research Production Appendix X - AFIS/INOP Special Projects Appendix XI - Reserve Training Support Summary . Appendix XII - AFSAC Regulations Review and Development LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS . Volume Volume Vol ume Volume Volume Volume GLOSSARY I - Narrative and Appendices II - Supporting Documents 1 - 54 . .. . III - Supporting Documents 55 - 96 . IV - Supporting Documents 97 - 168 . V - Supporting Documents 169 - 217. . VI - Supporting Documents 218 - 229 . 110 110 110 111 114 115 115 116 125 125 126 142 142 143 148 153 190 220 221 ix
LIST OF TABLES CHAPTER - NUMBER TITLE PAGE 1-1 AFIS/DP Budget Status . . . . 10 1-2 Intelligence Career Development Program (ICDP) : : 12 Training Status 1-3 AFIS Training Summary . .- - 15 1-4 Professional Military Education (PME) Training - - 15 1-6 S xpenses. . . . . + 1-7 Ground Accident Summary. . . 35 2-1 Summary of AFIS/INSD Operations. .- .- . . . . 69 3-1 Summary of AFIS/RE Expenditures - - . . . . . 75 3-2 New Reserve Training Locations - - - - . . . 78 3-3 Reserve IMA Authorization Summary - - - . 84 3-4 Reserve ROPA and Unit Vacancy Program Status . . 86 3-5 Reserve Enlisted Promotion Status - - - . 87 3-6 Reserve Awards and Decorations Summary - . . . 87 3-7 Attache Selection Statistics -- - se 6 . 92 3-8 Attache Promoticn Statistics - - - - - - «. . 93 3-9 AFIS/INR Budget Status : oe ew www 8B 3-10 Compass Call Activities - 1982 a a 1 1) Deleted per 5 U.S.C. 552(b) (1)
DATc JAN 12 CHRONOLOGY EVENT PAGE --. 108 The Soviet Awareness Division (AFIS/INCR) made a ... 108 major change in the content of its presentations on Soviet military forces for Soviet Military Power Weeks (SMPWs), Soviet Military Power Days (SMPDs) and all roadshows. The change involved creating two new presentations, "Soviet Readiness for War" and "Intercontinental War", and restructuring an existing presentation, "Theater War". New Common User Baseline for the Intelligence Com- ... 61 munity (CUBIC) Configuration Management procedures went into effect for AFIS contractors and the entire CUBIC user community. The General Defense Intelligence Program (GDIP) re- source adds for FY82-83 were distributed. A total of 15 officers, nine enlisted, and four civilians were allocated to intelligence endeavors ranging from Project SEEK and Camouflage, Concealment and Decep- tion Studies to Editor/Translators and Common User Data Base for Intelligence Community (CUBIC) configur- ation management. Eight additional GDIP resources were allocated to the Directorate of Intelligence Data Management (AFIS/IND) in support of CUBIC type programs. A major initiative began to investigate alternatives ... 17 to the 1100th Air Base Wing (ABW) as the servicing Consolidated Base Personnel Office (CBPO) for all AFIS elements. To meet unit imagery analysis needs, the Special ... 43 Studies Division (AFIS/INOA) relocated most of its analysts to the National Photographic Interpretation Center at the Washington Navy Yard. Technical Sergeant Barry L. Bahler, assumed duty as ... 39 the first full-time Public Affairs representative for AFiS. xi s.c. $52(b) (2) Deleted per 5 U.
DATE FEB 22Feb- Svar HAR 13-14 17Mar- 8Apr APR xii EVENT An AFIS OL-F representative acted as coordinator ... and focal point for intelligence inputs and re- quests for information regarding electronic war- fare during exercise Green Flag 82. The Modular Architecture for Exchange of Intelli-... gence (MAXI) was declared the DODIIS Standard Single Processor Automated Message System (AMHS). Two AFIS reorganizations were reviewed, approved ... and implemented. The Directorate of Attache Affairs (AFIS/INH) created an Officer Selection/ Training and Support/Area Specialist Division and an Enlisted Selection/Administration Division. The Directorate of Operational Intelligence, Intelligence Research Division (AFIS/INOI) created branches re- flecting major areas of responsibility (i.e. Missile and Space Branch and C3 and Intelligence Branch). The National Capital Area Reserve Area Director- ... DTS Commander Workshop was held at Fort Belvoir. The workshop provided a forum for DTS Commanders to review areas of management, operations and per- sonnel with an objective to further refine and improve the existing Air Force Intelligence Reserve (AFIR) prograr, AFSAC supported Team Spirit 82, a joint Republic ... of Korea (ROK) and U.S. field training exercise. The AFIS/DA Pentagon Support Branch (AFIS/DAU) was eliminated. Its functions were transferred to AFIS/INSA along with two AFIS/DA positions. The third DAU position was transferred to the AFIS Logistics Division (AFIS/LG). The Special Activity Applications Group (AFIS/ INOH) was formally established within AFSAC at Fort Belvoir. The AFIS inspector General (AFIS/IG) conducted a Management Effectiveness Inspection (MEI) of | Overall rating PAGE 134 61 76 145 28 48 C
DATE EVENT PAGE APR 26Apr- AFSAC supported the Flintlock 82 exercise which ... 145 23Ma y took place in Vaihingen, Federal Republic of Germany. MAY 20 A feasibility Study found the Directorate of eee 7 Evasion and Escape/PW suitable for Manpower Standards development. This function had never been studied before and presented a "ground-up" building effort for AFIS/MO. 24-28 The first worldwide AFSAC Commanders' Conference ... 150 was held at Headquarters AFSAC, Fort Belvoir. 15 The Directorate of Operational Intelligence, rr) Intelligence Research Division (AFIS/INOI) for- mally reorganized from two branches (Strategic Systems and Aircraft/Defensive Missiles) to three branches (Missile and Space, Aircraft, and C3 and Intelligence). In addition, the division was directed to initiate manpower acquisition for a fourth branch which would address Third World activities. 21 AFSAC established a board of senior management ... 147 officials in Headquarters AFSAC to formulate fiscal policy, work management problems, and serve as a body to review corporate AFSAC fiscal and resource submissions. 28 Following up on the 1981 Intelligence Individual ... 7 . Mobilization Augmentee Restructuring, AFIS/MO began a comprehensive review of intelligence IMA requirements. This review stressed reduction or elimination of Air Force Specialty Codes (AFSCs) (particularly non-intelligence AFSCs) reflected on the wartime untasked AFSC list. JUL 1 The Civilian Potential Appraisal System (CPAS) ratings replaced the Supervisory Appraisal of Employees Performance which had been used for the last several years. ... 14 xiii
DATE JUL 12 15 27-29 AUG xtv EVENT ° The Personnel Training, Education and Career Development Division (AFIS/DPT) was created. For the first time, wartime mission responsi- bilities were addressed in the AFIS Organiza- tion and Function Chartbook, AFISR 23-1. The Collateral Security Division (AFIS/INSA) eee assumed a portion of the functions previously performed by the Intelligence Reference Branch (AFIS/INDOC). The AFIS Inspector General (AFIS/IG) conducted a Management Effectiveness Inspection (MEI) of . Overall rating- The first edition of the official AFIS news- paper, The Intelligencer, was printed and dispatched. Per tasking by AFIS/MO, the AFSAC Plans and Policy Branch (AFSAC/INXA) reviewed AFSAC's wartime augmentation requirements with regard toward changing 702XX reserve requirements {which were to be deleted under new DOD and USAF/MPM quidance) into 20370 and 201XX slots. The overall number of reserve positions authorized for AFSAC did not change, only the Air Force Specialty Codes (AFSCs). The AFIS Manpower and Organization Division (AFIS/MO) replaced the Air Force Standardization Organizational Structure Codes (OSCs) used in the Unit Manpower Documents (UMD) with func- tional office symbols. This initiative made the UMD more manageable. The Deputy Secretary of Defense directed that bee the military departments implement a program of polygraph screening for persons with Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) access. The poly- graph examination would address counter-intelligence questions only. Under the new direction, the Per- sonnel Security Civision (AFIS/INSB) would determine which Air Force personnel would be polvgraphed and the Air Force Office of Special Investigation (AFOSI) would concuct the actual polygrasn examinations. PAGE 15 63 33 40 146 64
DATE EVENT PAGE AUG 17-28 AFSAC supported the Uichi Focus Lens 82 command ... 145 post exercise held at Taegu AB, Republic of Korea. SEP 19-30 Exercise Ridge Runner 82 was conducted at Camp ... 10¢ Dawson, West Virginia. This exercise was the second in a series of annual joint service eva- sion training exercises sponsored and conducted by the Evasion and Escape, Prisoner of War Direc- torate (AFIS/INR). The explicit purpose of the exercise was to provide concentrated training for selected members of all four U.S. Armed Ser- vices whose duties entailed teaching and or briefing U.S. combat personnel on the subject of evasion or conducting basic, advanced, or con- tinuation evasion training. Fifty-one student trainees, including members of the Royal Air Force, United Kingdom, participated. 27 The Target Intelligence Division (AFIS/INOT) ees 56 was elevated to directorate level as the Direc- torate of Targets (AFIS/INT). -- The Readiness Command (REDCOM) Intelligence eee 62 Data Handling System (IDHS) achieved an initial operating capability. -- Preliminary planning began to examine the feasi- ... 25 bility of constructing a new Air Force Intelli- gence facility at Bolling AFB, D.C. 1° Brigadier General Bissell (AFIS/CC) merged the... 4 AFIS Vice Commander (AFIS/CV) and Chief of Staff (AFIS/CS) positions. The new position retained the Vice Commander designation and was located at Fort Belvoir. Colonel William B. Sherman, formerly Director of Operational Intelligence (AFIS/INO), assumed the duties of the amalgamated Vice Commander position. Colonei Alfons Broz (AFIS/CS) served as a Special Assistant to the Commander until his re- tirement on 1 November. 1 AFSAC created a new Career Management and Training ... 147 Branch (AFSAC/IKXC) by consolidating the training functions of AFSAC/INOB with the career management functions of AFSAC/INX. The primary mission of the new branch was to identify, select, and train AFSAC personnel, and to provide for their career progression. XV
DATE oct 120ct- 12Nov 15 -180ct- SNov 250ct- 5Nov 15 Ces) ra ht xvi EVENT AFIS OL-F personnel supported Coronet Zippo testing. A supply account was established between Head- quarters AFIS and Fort Belvoir which allowed AFIS supply custodians to purchase items through the U.S. Army supply system. This new account elimi- nated the previous need for numerous supply trips to distant locations such as Bolling and Andrews AFBs. The AFIS Inspector General (AFIS/IG) conducted a Management Effectiveness Inspection (MEI) of the . Overall rating- . - Exercise Proud Saber 83 was conducted. It eval- ... uated the readiness and responsiveness of the Air Force Reserve to properly react to mobiliza- tion tasking in time of national emergency. The Attache Affairs Area Specialist Board con- vened to select 13 candidates to enter training in FY83. The 13 selected were scheduled to attend training for a Master's degree and language in a specific geographical area, The geographical areas to be studied included Soviet, Sub-Saharan Africa, Far East, Middle East, Latin America and Western and Eastern Europe. AFIS OL-F hosted a Precision Location Strike Sys- .. tem (PLSS) Intelligence Support Conference with representatives of AF/INEG, AFIS OL-N, AFSAC/ INA and FTD. Construction began to conver ae wee at Fort Belvoir, into a new SenStcive Lompartmented Information Facility (SCIF) for use by the Air Force Special Activities Center (AFSAC). A second floor ianding within the AFIS compound . at Fort Belvoir collapsed. Two enlisted personnel received multiole injuries. AFIS established an Office of Information Systems .. Management Team. The team provided management and vidance for Office Information Systems Management 1318) within AcIS. PAGE 134 26 33 77 95 112 25 35 31 ~ < © os v ? i) % 4 Pd g oy S “~~ a) wt on 2 —_ “N w wn 3 ” & a) 3 e. 3 » .) FE:
CHAPTER J MISSION, RESOURCES AND SUPPORT ACTIVITIES MISSION, ORGANIZATION AND COMMAND Mission ®* The Air Force Intelligence Service {AFIS) provided specialized intelligence services and information to Headquarters United States Air Force (USAF) and Air Force Commanders worldwide by collecting, processing, and disseminating intelligence information. The National Security Act of 1947, as amended, authorized the Air Force to collect, evaluate, correlate, and disseminate departmental inteliigence. Department of Defense directives called for the Air Force to provide an organization capable of furnishing adequate, timely, and reliable intelligence for Department of Defense use. In 1971, the Secretary of the Air Force directed the realignment of Air Staff operating and support functions to other organizations. As a means of continuing the original intelligence mission, the Air Force Intelligence Service was established on 27 dune i972, as a Separate Operating Agency (SOA) with Headquarters at Fort Belvoir, Virginia. Organization Throughout 1982, AFIS continued to support USAF planning and combat operations and responded to changing Air Force intelligence requirements. AFIS retained eight directorates to support its mission. These included Operational Intelligence (AFIS/INO), Security and Communications Management (AFIS/INS), Intelligence Data Management (AFIS/IND), Personnel (AFIS/DP), Attache Affairs (AFIS/INH), Intelligence Reserve Forces (AFIS/RE), Soviet Affairs (AFIS/INC), and Evasion, Escape and Prisoner of War (AFIS/INR). An additional directorate was created in September with the elevation of the Targeting Division to directorate level (AFIS/INT). (See Figure 1).4 The Operational intelligence Directorate provided the Air Force with all-source intelligence affecting Air Force policies, resources, force deployment and employment, indications and warning, intelligence analysis of current operations, and special intelligence research; provided intelligence support of electronic warfare activities; and ensured that the Secretary of the Air Force, the Chief of Staff, and key Air Staff officers received the timely and accurate intelligence necessary to assess critical situations in world crises. The Security and Communications Management Directorate oversaw the worldwide Air Force Special Security Office and Specia} Activities Office and ensured compliance with security policies that covered special intelligence and intelligence telecommunications.
Inspector Genera} Admin Comptroller Hq Squadron Div Division Section a6 aC <c@ O/Security and Communications Mgmt * Collateral Scty & Admin Spt Personnel Scty Mamt __ AF Spect Scty Office aH N/Soviet Affairs * Literature Research Soviet Awareness Ass Code of Conduc t/SRE Defense Spt Programs eiri¢ LEGEND Center * = Pentagon + = Bolling AFB, OC aoe Onerations At sar. Plans, Resources we Resources & AF Speci Activities Cc ty Vice Commander History Office Intel Data Management Ops % Seve}apment grt Civilian Pers Military Pers lirn, Education & Career Develop- acnt ge re Commander INC . , Pers D/Intel Rese Sentor Enlisted Advisor Logisitics Manpower & Division Organization mc Fo. D/Operational Intelligance Spec) Studies Intel Research eneenahes Geodesy Photo Research A e erospace inte} qt Operations Personnei Mgmt Administration Ia Kirtland AFB, NM Eglin AFB, FL Kelly AFC. TX Alexandria, VA zn ' As of: 31 Dec 82 5 U/Attache Affairs Officer Selection/trn & Spt/Area Spec! Enlisted Selections Public Affairs Cffice D/ Targets . Concepts % Anplications Mapping, Charting & (lL aunbig, JOLAMIS JZINIDIVAUNI VINISUTA “YI0A139 1403 33u04 oly 40 NOLivZINDOYO
bor The Intelligence Data Management Directorate planned, coordinated, and exercised managerial control of worldwide Air Force intelligence data handling systems. The Intelligence Reserve Forces Directorate managed the Air Force Intelligence Service's Intelligence Reserve program. Responsibilities included the recruitment, administration, readiness training, and operational use of assigned and attached mobilization augmentees in support of active forces, peacetime requirements, and contingency mission requirements. The directorate also developed, reviewed, and revised programs, plans, and operations documents affecting the Air Force Intelligence Service's Intelligence Reserve program. The Soviet Affairs Directorate conducted the Air Force's Soviet Awareness Program, consisting of the Soviet Military Thought and Studies in Communist Affairs books series, “Soviet Press Selected Translations" periodical, internal publications, the Soviet Military Power Week, Soviet Awareness Team, and the Soviet Military Literature Research facility.9 a cad The Evasion and Escape and Prisoner of War Directorate ided centralized management and cohesive direction to al} aspects prov of intelligence support of evasion and escape and prisoner of war matters and served as the action office for Department of Defense Code- of-Conduct training.1 The Personnel Directorate provided assistance and recommendations on all matters that pertained to military and civilian personnel acquisition and assignment, career development and training, career management, and liaison between worldwide intelligence ‘activities and the Air Force Manpower and Personnel Center.1! The newly formed Targets Directorate provided expertise on targeting, weapons, geodesy, and cartography and served as the Department of the Air Force contact with the Defense Mapping Agency. 1¢ & Besides the major directorates, eight additional agencies provided special staff support. These included the Administrative, Comptroller, Logistics, Manpower and Organization, and Plans Divisions, the Headquarters Squadron Section and the History and Public Affairs Offices. These offices reported directly to the AFIS Vice Commander. The Inspector General and Senior Enlisted Advisor reported directly to the AFIS Commander. Other agencies assigned to AFIS included the Air Force Special Activities Center (AFSAC)* and four Operating Locations (OLs) -- OL-AF, Kirtland AFB, New Mexico; OL-F, Eglin AFB, Florida; OL-N, Kelly AFB, Texas; and OL-M, Alexandria, Virginia. !3 * AFSAC provided centralized management over all the Air Force activities involved in the collection of information from Human Resources. Major subordinate units were located in Air Force European and Pacific commands.
In addition to the creation of the Targeting Directorate . (AFIS/INT), three other organizational changes took place in 1982. The Public Affairs Office was established as a separate organization; a new Training, Education and Career Development Division (AFIS/OPT) was created within the Personnel Directorate; and the AFIS, Chief of Staff position was eliminated. 14* Command During 1982, Brigadier General Schuyler Bissell continued as Commander of AFIS and Deputy Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence (DACS/1), Headquarters USAF, Washington, D.C. Throughout his career, General Bissell] held a variety of positions including operationa} assignments with the Air Training Command, duty as an ingtructor pilot, flight commander and squadron evaluation section chief,1 Sg While assigned to the 497th Tactical Fighter Squadron at Ubon Royal Air Force Base, Thailand, General Bissell flew 119 combat missions, totaling 187 hours in F-4 aircraft over North Vietnam. From September 1968 to July 1970, the general was an action officer in the Directorate of Operations at Headquarters USAF, and was also a member of the Operations Review Group that evaluated air operations in the Republic of Vietnam. Acting in support of a Corona Harvest study, the general was a member of a group that examined Strategy for the employment of air power in Southeast Asia. After completing the Army War College in June 1971, he was assigned to the Air Training Command at Vance AFB, Oklahoma, where he served as Base Commander, Deputy Commander for Operations and Wing Commander for the 7ist Flying Training Wing. In July 1974, he transferred to Reese AFB, Texas, as Commander of the 64th Flying Training Wing. He remained at that post until he departed for Washington, D.C., in May 1975, to begin training for an Attache assignment, He served as United States Defense Attache and Air Attache to Israel from August 1976 to August 1979. The general then became Deputy Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence, Combined Forces Command, and Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence for United States. Forces Korea. He assumed his present position on 22 July 1981, 17** The cniy change in command structure in 1982 involved the amalgamation of the AFIS Vice Commander and Chief of Staff positions. One of the initial actions Genera] Bissell took after assuming duties as Commander of AFIS was to establish a new Chief of Staff position and office at Fort Belvoir. Colonel Alfons L. Broz was selected to fill ins important new position which became effective 1 October 1981, * See the appropriate sections within this history for additional information. ** For additional information, see the official biography, SD-2. + Colonel Broz was projected to retire on 1 November 1982.
During the next year, a strong management and leadership presence at Fort Belvoir proved to be highly effective and responsive to the growing needs of AFIS. In order to continue that presence and to free up a valuable senior management position for use elsewhere, General Bissell] elected to amalgamate the AFIS Vice Commander (AFIS/CV) and Chief of Staff (AFIS/CS) positions.19 The new position retained the Vice Commander designation and was located at Fort Belvoir. Colonel William B. Sherman, formerly Director of Operational Intelligence (AFIS/INO), assumed the duties of the amalgamated Vice Commander position. Colonel Jack Morris, relinquished his prior Vice Commander duties and assumed duties (on a full-time basis) as the AF/IN Executive Officer. After relinquishing his Chief of Staff duties, Colonel Broz served as a Special Assistant to the Commander until his retirement on 1 November. All changes were effective 1 October 1982.29 ; RESOURCES MANOQWER Mission and Resources The Manpower and Organization Division (AFIS/MO) managed AFIS and Air Force wide reserve Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) authorizations; managed active manpower authorizations; controlled the AFIS organizational structure; conducted manpower surveys; and determined manpower requirements. AFIS/M) began 1982 with three branches -- Resources, Requirements, and Management Engineering. On 1 April, a new two-branch structure was instituted to better define responsibilities and serve AFIS. The Resources and “Productivity Branch emphasized dedication to censervation of, and participation in, the full utilization of critical resources. The Engineering and Requirements Branch stressed identification of functional manpower needs and dedicated support of the Management Engineering Program (MEP) started in 1981. Essentially, both new branches were created to provide better service capability to AFIS customers and lend intensified emphasis to both Air Force wide programs (productivity, resource control, organization structure control) and command resource management efforts. Manning authorizations within MO remained unchanged throughout the year. The division retained one officer and five enlisted positions. Major John S..Follrod continued as Chief. Operations January marked the beginning of a concerted effort to acquire an on-site dedicated Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) capability to process Command Manpower Data System (CMDS) updates and changes. Air Force elimination of punch card batch processing for CMDS programs made it imperative for MO to possess CRT processing capability. Major Folirod projected full operational status in the third quarter of Fiscal Year (FY) 83.23
6 d The General Defense Intelligence Program (GDIP) resource adds for FY 82-83 were distributed in January. A total of 15 officers, nine enlisted, and four civilians were allocated to intelligence endeavors g iti resources were allocated to trectorate of Inte} igence Data Management (915/10) Qa Two reorganizations were reviewed, approved and implemented in March. The Directorate of Attache Affairs (AFIS/INH) created an Officer Selection/Training and Support/Area Specialist Division and an Enlisted Selection/Administration Division. The Directorate of Operational Intelligence, Intelligence Research Division (AFIS/INOI) created branches reflecting major areas of responsibility (i.e. Missile and Space Branch, Aircraft Branch, and C3 and Intelligence Branch). In both cases, functional recognition was greatly enhanced and customer contact improved. Two additional reorganizations were approved during 1982. These included the Directorate of Personnel and The Target Intelligence Division. AFIS/MO reviewed, approved and implemented a reorganization of the Directorate of Personnel (AFIS/DP) effective 12 July. A Traning, Education, and Career Development Division (AFIS/OPT) was established to emphasize the critical nature «-: procurring, training, and retaining valuable personnel intelligence resources. The centralized management of career intelligence personnel would greatly enhance the Air Force's ability to keep abreast of sensitive events of intelligence value. The Target Intelligence Division (AFIS/INOT) was elevated to directorate level as the Directorate of Targets (AFIS/INT) effective 27 September. This action acknowledged the level of responsibility, coordinatign, and authority exercised by target intelligence personnel.¢? The Manpower and Organization Division also conducted a major review of AFIS and Office of Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence (AF/IN) National Capital Region (NCR) authorizations in September. The review was significant in that in addition to the number of authorizations allocated to each office, the Management Headquarters versus non-Management Headquarters responsibilities of each office, and the special inter-relationship between AF/IN and AFIS offices were addressed and made a matter of record. If the recommendations provided in this review were adopted, major shifts in responsibilities and resources would occur, resulting in a substantial growth of AF/IN and complimentary reduction of AFIS. No additional information was available by the end of the year 28 AFIS/MO facilitated the launching of a Quality Circle (QC) management program by arranging for Colonel Alfons Broz (AFIS, Chief of Staff) to attend the Executive Seminar on the QC process at Wright- Patterson AFB, Ohio on 20 April. This was followed up with
representatives from M2 and the Administrative Division (DA) attending a five day QC course at Wright-Patterson from 16-20 August. AFIS/DA . had volunteered to be the first QC. This was a new management initiative within AFIS and promised increased productivity through worker invoivement.29 A Feasibility Study completed on 20 May, found the Directorate of Evasion and Escape/POW suitable for Manpower Standards development. This function had never been studied before and presented a "ground-up" building effort for MO. On 25 June, MO received Air Force Management Engineering Agency (AFMEA) approval of its Manpower Standard Study for the Office of the Security Police, Air Force Security Clearance Office in 1980- 81. That was an encouraging event for the AFIS Management Engineering Program (MEP), as efforts through the end of 1982 in the Directorate of Security and Communications Management, Personne! Security Division (AFIS/INSB) Manpower Standard Study had yet to be realized. As of 31 December, several INSB study issues were still unresolved. ae Following up on the 1981 Intelligence Individua} Mobilization Augmentee Restructuring, MO began a comprehensive review of intelligence IMA requirements on 28 June. Requiring a comprehensive closely coordinated evaluation of Major Command (MAJCOM) needs, this review stressed reduction or elimination of Air Force Speciaity Codes (AFSCs}) (particularly non-intelligence AFSCs) re- flected on the wartime untasked AFSC list. As the central manager for intelligence IMAs, MO's goa! was achievement of a “lean and mean" manpower posture in the reserve program, paralleling that of the active duty posture. For the first time, wartime mission responsibilities were addressed in the AFIS Organization and Function Cnartbook, AFISR 23-1 on 15 July. The chartbook had undergone a complete revision prior to its publication. Manpower's concern with clarifying the wartime role of AFIS was extended to civilian utilization on 25 August. At that time, AFSAC was tasked to identify those civilian positions deemed Wartime Essential. A clear picture of IMA reserve requirements necessary to backfitl vacated military and civilian positions due to hostile actions was now achieveable. 33 Pursuing MO‘s aggressive MEP initiative, the divisian completed a Feasibility Study in Headquarters AFSAC on 19 July. The Study identified the Command Section and the Pians and Resources, ard Support Division as suitable for Manpower Standards development. The actual standard study would yieid five manpower standards encompassing approximately 20 authorizations. On 4 August, MO replaced the Air Force Standardization Organizational Structure Codes (OSCs) used in the Unit Manpower Document {UMD} with functional office symbols. This initiative made the UMD much more manageable. The entire AFIS community found this document easier to use in this configuration. 39
The 1982 Productivity Report, completed on 30 September, marked a giant step forward for “0 in terms of extracting substantial initiatives from the functional managers and presenting those goals in realistic achieveable terms. The division's attention to the Fast Payback Capital Investment Program (FASCAP) also enabled AFIS to realize a 400 percent increase in proposals forwarded to Air Force for approval (i.e. four proposals in 1982 versus one proposal in 1981) .3 in MO's effort to achieve total involvement in the management of the command's resources. The visit afforded OL-F personnel an opportunity to get to knew, and confront directly, the office responsible for answering their manpower requirements. Similarily, it permitted MO to gain insight into the physical, and operational Situation which defined that 0L.3?7 Major Follrod also travelled with the AFIS/IG team to visit the European Special Activities Area (ESAA) from 30 October to 7 November. In addition to reinforcing the value of MO representation on the IG team, ground work was laid for a manpower study of ESAA in: the summer/fall of 1983, and valuable insight was gained which enabled MO to, accurately respond to pressing manpower adjustment needs within ESAA. Manpower and Organization experienced another first in October with its participation in Exercise Proud Saber. The division's efforts to convert its CMDS IMA files to active duty in reaction to this Air Force wide exercise was a valuable learning experience. Several interface problems with the computer programs were identified and presented to Air Force for resolution. The relatively smail size of MO allowed them to manually work around the reserve to active exchange problem. It was unlikely, however, that such patch work fixes would meet the requirements for future exercises. The criteria for timeliness had to be maintained.3 Special Problems The Management Engineering Program (MEP) which began in AFIS in 1981 had not achieved program objectives. It became apparent that such a program, conducted under the auspices of AFR 25-5, Air Force Management Engineering Program (MEP), could not thrive in AFIS without significant reshaping of MO's approach. Aiternatives to the formal Air Force MEP program were explored -- alternatives which would afford the command the benefit of AFR 25-5 methodology without its rigidly structured recording, reporting and approval procedures. Coupled with the policy and overhead nature of the command's functions, AFR 25-5 procedures tended to eliminate the functional flexibility necessary to respond to the commands growth and dynamic changes in mission emphasis and or requirements. 6 Another significant first for MO was. icipation in th AFIS Inspector General (IG) visit to a 26-31 July. at event marked another step orwar
tudies began in 1932 should provide sufficient experience and lessons learned to determine the future of the command MEP proaram. Major Follrod sought to draw upon the technical aspects of the Air Force MEP process while reducing the formal documentation and dispensing with external review and staffing requirements. With those refinements, he expected to make continuing progress toward a command program which would provide functional managers with sound, objective management tools to identify their manpower needs and to redistribute their resources as missions changed. 41 PERSONNEL Mission and Resources The Directorate of Personnel (AFIS/DP) provided the Commander of AFIS with assistance and recommendations on all matters that pertained to AF/IN-AFIS military and civilian personnel acquisition and assianment, career development and training, career management, and liaison petween worldwide intelligence activities and the Air Force Manpower and Personnel Center and Palace Sentinel. It also monitored USAF intelligence community personnel resources and programs. Tne directorate significantly changed its prior organizational structure containing two major subdivisions -- the Civilian Personnel Division (AFIS/DPC) and the Military Personnel Resources Division (AFIS/DPR), with the addition of a third section, the Training, Education and Career Development Division (AFIS/DPT) on 12 July. As of 31 December, AFIS/D° was authorized a total of 13 positions (eight military and five civilians) with 14 assigned (nine military and five civilians). The one additional military member was projected to remain an overage until the establishment of a new Lanquage and Area Studies Branch (AFIS/DPTL) in 1983. The military person listed as an overage was scheduled for terminal leave (pending retirement) in August 1982.* Table I-i provides a summary of the DP budget as of 31 December. 43 The Civilian Personnel Division (AFIS/DPC) provided complete competitive and excepted civilian personnel support to managers and to operating Civilian Personnel Offices (CPOs). The division developed policy and directives internal to AFIS that pertained to civilian personnel management; acted as the central point of contact with managers and CPOs on all personnel actions and programs; administered the civilian awards.and decorations programs; evaluated personnel management requests that affected staffing actions against manpower authorizations; maintained a civilian personnel data base; administered the functional area of the Civilian Intelligence Career Development Program (ICDP); provided assistance to the functional managers at all levels on all aspects of the ICDP Air Force wide; received policy guidance from Headquarters USAF and the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Manpower, Reserve Affairs, and Installations); * Appendix III contains a complete summary of authorized and assianed strength for AFlo.
10 advised management at all levels on a variety of civilian personnel problems, including matters such as supergrade actions, consultant appointments, high-grade ceiling control, and other position actions; controlled supervisory and high-arade civilian positions; and managed the internal civilian career development program. 44 TABLE 1-1 AFIS/DP BUDGET STATUS MFP CATEGORY ANNUAL TARGETS 9 Travel $5,900 Equip Rent $7 ,000 Equip Maint $4,700 Contr Svcs $1,000 Non-stock supplies $13,000 Non-stock equipment $ 3,000 TOTAL: 333,700 9 Travel $35,500 Education $ 9,009 TOTAL: $44,500 9 Civ move allowance $ .000 Travel $10,000 TOTAL: $10,000 3 Civ move allowance $ 1,200. PCS Civ $10,000 Transportation $32,860 TOTAL: $25,900 The Training, Education And Career Development Division (AFIS/DPT) provided complete service to all military and civilian personnel in the Metropolitan Area, as well as the CONUS AFIS Operating Locations. AFIS/DPT scheduled all training of AF/IN-AFIS military and civilian personnel;* insured mandatory courses identified on civilian ICOPs were completed along with desirable courses as funds permitted; insured each civilian in ICDP had a five year ICDP plan and completed the required trainina; insured civilians completed their Individual Development Plan (IDP), if funds permitted; used the Pipeline Management System (PMS). to properly manage Command training requirements, validations, allocations, sub-allocations; budgeted for, and obtained additional funding if necessary, for fiscal year training needs of AF/IN civilians, AFIS military, and AFIS civilians - each * This included all residence and correspondence courses, as weil as arranging for instructors to come TDY to the area if it saved Air Force travel funds. It also included scheduling all professional training, as well as Professional Military Education (PME), such as Squadron Officer School (S0S}, NCO Academy (NCOA), NCO Leadership School (NCOLS), Executive/Mid-Level Development, etc.
1] having its owr budaet; worked closely with the Consolidated Base Personnel Office (CBPO) and Central Civilian Personnel Office (CCPO) to insure orders were cut and allocations made; worked closely with the Office of Civilian Personnel Operations (OCPO) concerning civilian trainina and with AFIS Comptroller concerning military training; monitored training opportunities, advertised them, and obtained quotas, as needed; worked special training Programs; insured training facilities, supplies, equipment, etc. were provided for instructors TOY to this area; worked with AFSAC in sub-allocating AFSAC controlled quotas (i.e. Military Operations Training Course, Military Operations Seminar) Air Force wide; monitored and funded special MAJCOM quotas for 203X0s, 208X0s; expanded AF/IN-AFIS participation in the Non- Resident Foreign Language Training Program; conducted annual screening and validation of AF/IN-AFIS training requirements; completed Air Force wide five year ICDP training requirements for DIA; managed the AFIS Suggestion Program; and budgeted for directorate expenses and AFIS civilian PCS moves. 45 = Together with the Air Force Manpower Personnel Center (AFMPC), the Military Personnel Resources Division (AFIS/DPR) identified and recommended qualified military personnel (lieutenant colone? and below - including noncommissioned officers) for assignment to Air Force Intelligence activities, including all worldwide Human Intelligence (HUMINT) collection organizations; monitored all AF/IN, AFIS and AFSAC military personnel assignment actions (lieutenant colonels and below - including noncommissioned officers), such as utilization, reassignment, and upgrades; established and implemented, as directed by AF/IN, command policies on all Air Force Intelligence activity military personnel assianments or reassignments; coordinated all personnel actions for the Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence _ Which involved colonel assianment actions for AF/IN and Air Force Intelligence Service activities; administered the military awards and decorations programs, officer effectiveness reports, and airmen performance reports; represented the Director of Personnel in al} personnei subsystem activities that formulated computer output products for staffing requirement information; managed the Air Staff Training program (ASTRA) for intelligence; assisted in staff planning, preparing advance analysis of personnel capability, and introduced personnel information and requirements as planning factors; and reviewed AFR 11-4 agreements and formulated the AFIS/DP position for all joint tenancy matters, 4 Civilian Personnel During 1982, a revision was mae to the Training Compendium, DOD 1430-10M3-TNG, dated August 1982, revising the Training Compendium dated November 1979. The publication contained over 400 course entries. The document was important to the careerist and the supervisor as a desk reference for career development planning.4 » In February, a chanoe was issued to Section VII, Appendix A (Page A-18) of the DISCAS Procedural Manual (DOD 1430.10M Annex 3: General Intelligence). This provided consistency in reqgisterina the varied adjectival ratinas developed by each component. In order to get the five-point value of the former “Outstanding Performance
12 Award", each careerist would get that credit for the highest rating available in the Component's official rating system (i.e., Air Force: Superior; Army: Exceptional; NDIA: Outstanding; FRD: Outstanding; Navy: Merit Pay: Substantially Exceed all Objectives; Non-Merit Pay: Outstanding). Only those performance ratings which had been completely certified were to be listed.4 The Intelligence Career Development Program (ICDP) Planning Group concurred with an automated DD Form 1932S, Narrative Supplement. The major change, other than automation, was that instead of six smal} entries for description of work, there would be four more extensive entries. In the validation and update process, the careerist could expand the experience. When a careerist changed jobs, was promoted, etc., the only requirement was to input the information for the new position -- reaccomplishing the entire form wes no longer required. The. new automat<d form should result in a more current and accurate data base of a careerist's experience. 49 Air Force ICDP registration data as of 11 November was 810 registered, but only 608 with current registration (68 percent). Table 1-2 provides a summary of AF/IN-AFIS ICDP trainee billet status as of 31 December. TABLE 1-2 ICDP TRAINING STATUS FULL JOURNEYMAN TRAINEE PROFESSIONAL LEVEL STATUS VACANT TOTALS AF/INER ] 1 1 - 3 AF /INEG 2 - ] - 3 AF/INES - 1 - - 1 AFIS/INCF - - 1 - l AFIS/INOI ] - 1 1 3 AFIS/INT 1 - ~ - 1 AFIS/INOZ8 (INEG) - 1 - - 1 AFIS/INOZB (INER) - - 1 - 1 AFIS/INCZB (INES) - - 4 - 4 AFSAC/Det 21 2 ‘ - 1 2 5 AFSAC/Det 22 - = 2 - 2 TOTALS 7 3 12 3 25 Review of a progosal to establish a civilian PALACE team with the OCPO, Rardoloh AF3, Texas, to handle ail Air Force civilian intelligence reauirements was disapproved by the Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence (ACS/I) on 23 December. The disapproval stated Air Force Intelligence must comoly with the DOD Intelligence Career Development Program {'CDP: wnder ONAN Nirertiye 5019.19 derived from
13 Title 5, Section 213.3196. The PALACE proposal overlapped ICDP requirements in many areas, presented a duplication of effort by the employees and their supervisors, and limited managenent flexibility which waS necessary in this area.}! Two new training courses were introduced during the year. This included the Advanced Scientific and Technical Intelligence Analyst Course (ASTIAC) and the DOD Strateaic Debriefing and Interrogation Course (DSDIC). The Defense Intelligence School (DIS) began developing a training course (ASTIAC) to follow the entry-level Scientific and Technical Intelligence Analyst Introductory Course (STIAIC). This new course was needed to meet training requirements of the mid-career analysts in S&T Intelligence. It was expected to be a one-week course which would be taken two to three years after completing the STIAIC. It was envisioned that the course would be sufficiently developed to be offered as a pilot course in the fall of 1983. The U.S. Army Intelligence Center and School (USAICS), Fort Huachuca, Arizona, began developing the DSDIC to improve the capabilities of personnel involved in the acquisition and exploitation of strategic intelligence from foreign and domestic sources and associated documents. Personnel from all services woulc attend the course and it would serve as advanced level training for DOD-wide strategic debriefing military and civilian officials. The first iteration was scheduled for early FY 84 with a course length of five weeks and four days.°2 Congress repealed the ceilina on high grade positions (GS-13 and above) which had been in effect since 1978. Air Force strongly pursued this legislative relief on the premise that it could more effectively manage high grade resources through prudent position management principles. Air Force developed a ratio system which was used as the normative standard for the control of high grades. Each MAJCOM, SOA and Direct Reporting Unit (DRU) was given a ratio of high grade positions to overall strength which had to be maintained. The ratios were developed by using the historical data for the past four years with aporopriate adjustments to reflect new target goals developed by DOD. The system should provide the maximum flexibility within the constraints under which DPC had to operate. Periodically, the ratios would need to be adjusted to compensate for functional realignments or when otherwise justified. The overall strength included GS, GM, SES, and ST positions. On 26 April, Headquarters USAF assigned AFIS a 29.16 percent high grade ratio to overall strength. Air Force indicated AF/IN strength remained at 14, based on usage history. Subsequent negotiation by AF/IN increased this figure to 16.* GD Executive order 12338, dated 11 January 1982, removed AF/IN from the provisions of the Federal Labor-Management Relations Program, Chapter 71, Title 5, of the U.S. Code. This meant that AF/IN and AFIS employees were no longer in @ bargaining unit and could not be represented by any labor union. Their civilian personnel * Reduction-in-Force (RIF) was not administered during 1982 for AF/IN or AFIS.
14 administration and management were now qoverned solely by AFRs in the 49 series and directives of higher authority. 5> The Union Contract no longer applied to AF/IN Genera} Mana (GM) previously identified under the new Merit Pay System in 1931. These employees were converted from General Schedule (GS) to GM effective 21 March. Within-Grade Increases and Quality Salary Increases which were effective on or before 21 March were granted. The Jot Ferformance Appraisal System (JPAS) was converted to the Genera’? ‘ianager Appraisal System (GMAS) for these individuals. A total, of 13 General Managers were identified for AF/IN and 16 for AFIS. On 1 July, Civilian Potential Appraisal System (CPAS) ratings replaced the Supervisory Appraisal of Employees Current Performance which had been used for the last several years. The new system rated current performance as a measure of a careerist's ability to compete for actions requiring promotion, reassignment, change to Tower grade, selection for training, and other actions which the Civilian pgrsonne| Office determined to warrant competitive procedures.9° In many cases, CPAS ratings determined whether an emp loyee would be referred for placement in a job. CPAS ratings were used to break ties among candidates with similar experience on promotion certificates when these ties existed. Once a year, an employee's first level supervisor rated an employee's current work behavior using the AF Form 1287. The form consists of 19 behavioral dimensions (rating elements). The CPAS rating scale ranged from one to nine. Employees could receive a wide range of ratings showing their particular strenaths and weaknesses, but most ratinas should be in the central range (four to six). The CPAS used several specific formuias which were apolied to the ratings. The formulas were developed after studying the Characteristics of oroups of Air Force civilian positons. Families of jobs were identified which possessed similar characteristics and joo requirements. Weights, or the importance of specific job requirements, were assigned to each behavioral dimension for these job families. These weights varied for each job family, and would, therefore, be applied differently to each behavioral dimension in order to convert the rating. The formula fur the job family of the position to be filled converted the ratings given to each behavioral dimension and the rating the employee received on that dimension.09 The key difference between CPAS and JPAS/GMAS was: (1) CPAS reflected an employee's current observable work behavior -- the CPAS rating would be converted to a measure of an employee's potential to perform in other positions; (2) JPAS/GMAS rated an emp loyees erformance against written job performance elements and standards (50a7s and objectives) over a scecified appraisal period. 69
15 Training, Education, ano Lareer Development Division vse The Training, Education and Career Development Division was established by Colonel Ronald Skorepa, Director of Personnel, on 12 July, by taking resources from within AFIS/OP and realigning them to create AFIS/DPT. The primary mission of DPT was to ensure that AF/IN- AFIS people were properly trained to meet mission requirements. The training program within AF/IN-AFIS continued to receive special emphasis throughout the year. It grew to the point where a separate division was created to properly handle all training needs. Tables 1- 3 and 1-4 shows the growth of AFIS training.61 * TABLE 1-3 AFIS TRAINING SUMMARY MILITARY CIVILIAN FY80 FY81 FY82 FY83 FY84 FY80 FY81 FY82 FY83 FY84 —meee ee ee Funds($000) 7.0 24.0 33.0 44.5 51.0 Unk 5.0 14.0 15.5 30.0° Quotas Unk 70 154 260 230 Unk 62 65 75 TABLE 1-4 PME TRAINING STATUS FY 89 FY 81 FY 82 FY 83 FY 84 Squadron Officer School (SOS) 3 3 5 10 Unk NCO Academy (NCOA) 3 3 4 12 5 NCO Leadership School (NCOLS) 3 2 8 15 7 AFIS/DPT picked up responsibility for the Non-Resident Foreign Language Training Program in 1982. A physical transfer of the tapes and texts inventory was completed late in the year. Development of the program was scheduled to take place in 1983, after the Annual Program Review (APR) in February. Projected plans included expanding the library to include desired language coverage, as well as expanding Air Force wice implementation of this program. * FYS3 and 84 statistics were projections. 120
16 The training program problem, identified in 1981, was resolved by establishing the AFIS/DPT division. A civilian was hired in November to handle all civilian training AF/IN-AFIS wide as well as to monitor the Air Force Intelligence Career .Development Program (ICDP). The individual was scheduled to attend training on the Pipeline Management Systems at Randolph AFB in 1983.63 _In June, AF 1S/0P forwarded a Feasibility Study of Establish- only part of it was implemented. Only the Formal Training Branch was established in July. The study also concentrated on establishing a Linguistic and Area Studies Branch (AFIS/DPTL). This branch was to serve as the single Air Force contact point for implementing a central DPR for foreign language programs, would work closely with Defense Language Institute's Foreign Language Center (DLIFLC), be the OPR for all advanced Academic Degree Programs required by AF/IN-AFIS, manage the Area Specialist Program, develop a mid-career intelligence officer career course, etc. AF/INY had a counter-proposal. Both were still under study at the end of 1982.64 In addition, the study proposed establishing a Reserve Training Branch (AFIS/DPTR) to consolidate training functions into one division within AFIS; submit requirements through the Pipeline Management System; permit better use of training quotas/opportunities for both active duty and Reservists; consolidate training funds into one “pot", become a member of the Air Force Intelligence Reserve Advisory Group (AFIRAG); conduct AFIS/RE training to include formal training, OJT, PME, Aerobics; etc. After discussion with AFIS/RE, the proposed AFIS/OPTR branch concept was cancelled due to the uniqueness of Reserve actions (i.e. ARPC controlled funds and quotas for Reserve training; could not send a reservist in an active duty quota and vice versa; etc.) Military Personnel Resources As a result of the major directorate reorganization instituted by Colonel Skorepa on 12 July, the Military Personnel Resources Division (AFIS/DPR) lost one officer and two enlisted billets from its authorized structure to form the Training, Education and Career Development Division. One Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) 7024 Captain billet, with Major Stephen Broyles as the incumbent, became the AFIS/DPT division chief, while one AFSC 73270 Technical Sergeant and one AFSC 73250 Staff Sergeant authorization were moved fron AF TS/DPR to form the core working element of the new training division. 66 AFIS/DPR continued to experience major problems with manning certain specific Air Force Specialty Codes (AFSCs) in the Intelligence (80XX) career field. Manning of the 802X HUMINT career field in Air Force Special Activities Center (AFSAC) units remained well below the Air Force manning standard for operational units, with an overall 71] percent figure. Another problem area was the 8044 imagery interpretation manning within AFIS; AFIS/DP was unable to gain
sufficient 8044 resources from Headquarters AFMPC/MPCROS4E, Palace Sentinel, to fill the increase in 8044 billets authorized for fiscal’ year 1982. Consequently the overall AFIS manning figures suffered a significant decrement, never attaining greater than an 86 percent figure for any month in 1982. This figure fell significantiy short of the overall goal of 95 percent manning for AFIS.67 Air Staff officer manning in 80XX stood at 97 percent by the end of 1982; AFIS manning was 85 percent and AFSAC manning was 71 percent. Non-80XX officer manning was 97 percent for the Air Staff, 102 percent for AFIS, and 100 percent for AFSAC. Contributing to the low AFSAC 80XX manning figures was the addition of ten billets to the AFSAC manning document during fiscal year (FY) 1983, beginning 1 October 1982. This AFSAC manning problem was projected to continue well into the future as the HUMINT infrastructure expanded wor Idwide in FY 84 and beyond.68 Competing manning priorities also. created significant manning problems for AFIS/DPR in 1982. Verbal and written manning priorities directed by the Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence (ACS/1), caused manning shortfalls in other AFIS Directorates when the overall AFIS manning was less than 100 percent. Specifically, AFIS/INOZC, the Intelligence Watch Facility, and AFIS/INC, the Soviet Awareness Team, had priority one fill requirements. Additionally, AFIS/AFSAC overseas units had a priority one fill. Consequently, manning shortfalls created by projected departures, particularly within AFIS/INC, caused AFIS/DPR to draft Soviet Awareness Team members from within available AFIS personnel resources in November to insure the continuity and viability of the Soviet Awareness Team. This action, involving two Captains assigned to AFIS/INOZB, caused _ Particular concern within AF/INE, the Directorate of Estimates, because they were asked to give up two officers in exchange for one. Such manning problems were expected to continue into the future. Airman assignments within AF/IN-AFIS staff elements achieved an all time record high for on-board enlisted strength in 1982. AF/IN elements were manned at an average of 100 percent with AFIS averaging 94.4 percent. Additionaily, AFSAC was manned at an average of 98.5 percent. Such manning levels were significantly better than MAJCOM/SOA manning standards of 85-90 percent. Colonel Skorepa believed that AFIS and AFSAC manning could be higher, but new authorizations were added to manning documents with immediate fill action required. Generally, AFIS/DP could not program a fiil in less than six months. Consequently, the overall enlisted manning figures suffered somewhat from the continually changing nature of the AFIS organization. Nevertheless, the significantly high manning percentage for AF/IN-AFIS enlisted billets was a tribute to the outstanding efforts ofthe personnel serving in the Airman Assignments Branch, AFIS/DPRA, 70 A major initiative was started in February to investigate alternatives to the 1100th Air Base Wing (ABW) as the servicing Consolidated Base Personnel Office (CBPO) for all AFIS elements. 4
18 AFIS/DP had received an unusually high number of complaints about inadequate servicing by the 1100th ABW/CBPO at Bolling AFB, D.C. from the time of the HUMINT amalgamation in October 1981. In general, the problems involved the servicing of AFSAC overseas units, particularly those in the European theater. Based upon an ever increasing list of compiaints, Lieutenant Colonel Michael Turoff, the Director of Personnel in February, initiated a study to pursue alternate means for servicing AFIS personnel. On 11 March, AFIS/DP sent a package to General Bissell recommending a change of CBPOs from the 1100 ABW to the Headquarters Office of Special Investigation (OSI) CBPO, also at Bolling AFB. General Bissell did not accept the AFIS/ODP recommendation and returned the package for further staffing. AFIS/OP resubmitted the CBPO change package again on 11 June, recommending the servicing CBPO for all AFIS personnel be combined with the AF/IN servicing CBPO, the 1947th Administrative Support Group (ASG). in the Pentagon. & A significant turn of focus on this issue occurred in July with the European trip of General Gissell. AFIS/OP prepared a point paper for General Bissell's trip, pointing out the status of the project as of 8 July. AFIS/DP resubmitted a package for staff action on 13 August, recommending Washington area personnel be serviced by the 1947th ASG in the Pentagon, and the decentralization of service to the nearest CBPO for geographically separated units (GSUs). General Bissell concurred in the AFIS/DP proposal on 29 September and agreed to decentralize the CBPO suppcrt for GSuUs./2 Ld Headquarters Air Force Manpower and Personnel Center (HQ AFMPC/MPCY) agreed to General Bisse’''s 29 September requests on 21 October. AFIS/OP requested AFMPC make some minor changes to their proposed Personnel Accounting System (PAS) code listing on 27 October. Headquarters AFMPC/MPCYCE agreed on 19 November. AFIS/DP informed the AF/IN-AFIS staff of the change in CBPO servicing policy for AFSAC units on 21 December. This request was being staffed at the end of 1982. AFIS/DP informed ail subordinate AFSAC overseas elements and proposed servicing CBPOs of the finalization of CBPO decentralization by message on 27 December. The change of CBPO servicing was scheduled to take place on 20 January 1983.73 MONETARY RESOURCES Comptroller Division The Comptroller Division (AFIS/AC) continued to direct the financial management system. This was accomplished by providing budgetary and fisca! management; providing advisory and analytic services to the commander, staff and directorates on policies and procedures that pertained tc resource management; and establishing information and financial control systems to assure efficient and timely management of resources./4 In accomplishing these requirements, the division maintained close liaison with the Air Staff at the Pentagon on matters that
19 related to budaet, accountinc, and management for AFIS; coordinated audit actions in response to the General Accounting Office and United States Air Force (USAF) Audit Agency (AFAA); established procedures to assure continuity of controller services under general or limited war or other emergency conditions; updated the Resource Management System (RMS) training program according to Department of Defense (00D) and Headquarters USAF directives; maintained an information requirements Management control system; analyzed cost and economics on new command programs and projects to support alternative resource allocation decisions; provided continuing program analyses to identify critical programs and evaluated resource management results; provided performance measurement tools to evaluate fiscal trends for management decision consideration; accomplished Special Studies for the commander and staff to promote increased organizational efficiencies; maintained a Management Information System (MIS) to support executive planning and decision making; and assured an accounting structure consistent with command management and_reporting requirements by monitoring and reviewing financial reports. 1 Other responsibilities included preparing budget submissions and performing liaison with USAF Comptroller and other Air Staff elements on connand fiscal requirements including Operations and Maintenance (0&4), Intelliaence Contingency Funds (ICF), and procured investment (3080) funds; monitoring fiscal impact of host tenant and interservice support agreements; making fiscal surveillance of contractual services and procurement actions; coordinating manpower requirements for comptroller functional taskings; formulating, coordinating and executing AFIS directives relative to resource allocation and financial] management policies and procedures; distributing annual budaet authorizations and quarterly allocations according to the financial plan; monitoring the budaet to make sure it complied with legal and administrative requirements; interpreting directives, regulations, and policy guidance that related to the proper fund management and resource management efficiency; focusing analytical efforts on assisting the commander and staff in resolving time-sensitive unforeseen resource and multi-functional area problems; and’ managing and administering al] appropriated funds and expense authority made available to AFIS. During 1982, one major organizational change occurred. The division reorganized the Management Analysis and Budget branches into one branch -- Management and Budaet. Major Lloyd S. Garner continued as the Comptrolier. The total manning included two officers, five enlisted personnel and one civilian (GS-5). Several actions tock place during the year. In March, Major Garner submitted an article to the Air Force Comptroller Magazine. The article gave a brief history of AFIS and the mission of the Comptroller function in a Separate Operating Agency (SOA) at headquarters level. The Air Force Audit Agency began an annual audit of Intelligence Contingency Funds in April. There were three findings within the AFSAC account that _required correcting; ail other accounts received satisfactory ratings.
20 Both budaet exercises -- the January Fiscal Year (FY) 84 Operations Operating Budget (008) and the May FY 83 Financial Plan (FP) -- were accomplished in a move timely and professional manner since the basic format had been stored on a word-processing system. Major Garner stated that he would continue to explore additional ways to automate individual Comptroller functions which would reduce the use of manual spread sheets and records.79 Accounting and Finance Two personnel actions were reported during the year. In Gctober, Staff Sergeant Sharlene K. Kegan was assigned to the AFIS Accounting and Finance Branch from Bolling AFB, D.C. In November, Senior Master Sergeant Robert L. Grove (Chief, Accounting & Finance) received notification of a Permanent Change of Station (PCS) assignment to Howard Air Base, Canal Zone, with reporting in July 1983. Master Sergeant Sovine (E-8 Selectee) assigned to the Air Force Academy, Denver, Colorado, was projected as his replacement with a reporting date in June 1983,89 Sergeant Grove spent most of January reviewing accounting records to determine the results of the FY 81 close-out. During February and March considerable time was spent with Boiling AFB accounting personnel purging prior fiscal year accounting records. During April, ail FY 82 commitments and obligations were reviewed to make sure all current year accounts were properly recorded. Ordinarily, this would be a routine action; however, the situation at AFIS was complicated because of the geographical separation of AFIS from the host accounting offices. As indicated earlier, the Air Force Audit Agency (AFAA) began their yearly audit of Intelligence Contingency Funds in April. The three findings in the AFSAC account required many man hours to correct. Therefore, the period from April through June was spent reviewing AFIS accounts and developing new accounting procedures, for control of contingency funds. Sergeant Grove believed tnat procedures developed during 1932 would strengthen the overall accounting controls for ICF monies and provide a smoother year end close-out. Management Analysis @ In February, Technical Sergeant Ronald £. LaCoss, Chief of the Management Analysis Branch (A: .S/ACM), became responsible for AFIS Pamphlet 179-1 Resource Management System (RMS) Guide. This pamphlet was prepared to give AFIS resource advisors clear quidance on using available resources and would be used in conjunction with semi annual RMS training sessions. The quide was published on 30 September. 83 From 1 March to 30 September, Sergeant LaCoss provided manning support to the Accounting and Finance branch until the arrival of Staff Seraeant Kegan. On 1 October the Budget and Management Analysis offices were combined to provide better support for AFIS. Since no additional people could he obtained for the AFIS/ACM
function, this was determined to be the most practical way to provide increased support to the AFIS staff. 84 & From 1-30 October, Seraeant LaCoss performed a special study for space utilization in the compound at Fort Belvoir to ensure all available floor space was effectively used. The results were presented to Colonel Sherman (AFIS/CV) with the following recommendations: (1) relocate the History Office from building T-1917 to building T-1929, and relocate the AFSAC Supply Section (AFSAC/LGS) from the rear of building T-1920 to building T-1919. This would provide space within building T-1917 which was scheduled to be used as i” AFSAC Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) in 1983. sad As the Comptroller Focal Point for the Fast Capital Payback (FAS Program for AFIS, Sergeant LaCoss assisted functional managers with packaae preparation and verified all cost data. During 1982, AFIS submitted four FASCAP proposals, of which two were approved and two were still pendina as of 31 December. The first proposal was submitted by the Director of Soviet Affairs (AFIS/INC) for a MICOM 2002 word processing system. This was purchased with FASCAP funds for $23,431 and would result in 2 life cycle savings of $116,536 of O&M funds. The second proposal was submitted by the AFIS Administration Division (AFIS/DA) for an AMTCS 4-45 off-set printing system. Again, the item was purchased with FASCAP funds for $47,092 with an anticipated life cycle savings of $197,084. The two proposals still pending at the end of the year included the purchase of six word processors. One proposal was for the purchase of three CPT 8000 word processors, two located at OL-N in San Antonio and one located at OL-F in Florida. The second prooosal involved the purchase of three 860T word processors, one in AFIS/AC and two in AFSAC,86 In November, Sergeant LaCoss began a special study of AFIS Civilian Hirine Practices to help reduce the amount of civilian vacancies in AFIS. This study, when completed, would be of significant value to AFIS in both hiring and budgeting for civilian employees. In addition, he reviewed the AFIS lease and or purchase study accomplished in 1980 and updated in 1981. This enabled AFIS to obtain an additional $65,909 (for appropriation of equipment items over $3,006) by 39 September. The additional funds were committed to other requirements by 31 December. Budaet During January, the FY 84 Operations Budget was submitted to Air Force and preparations were made to attend the Air Force Operating Budget Review Committee {08RC) meeting in February. During the meeting, the AFIS operations budaet was successfully defended. In March, First Lieutenant Terrence M. Frost, Budget Officer, was sent for six weeks temporary duty {(TDY) to the Air Force Intelligence Resource Management Group (AF/INYR) at the Pentagon to assist in the preparation of the Air Force General Defense Intelligence Program (GDIP). Also in March, Major Garner traveled to Patrick AFB, Florida, ~~
22 to review the FY 82 Advanced Range Instrumentation Ship (ARIS) and FY 83 Cobra Judy reauirements,83 * The FY 33 Financial Plan (FP} was due in May. During this time frame, Major Garner was occupied almost exclusively with the audit of the intelligence contingency funds. Master Sergeant Michael £. Hansen planned and scheduled mid-year reviews of all AFIS programs with individual resource advisors and program managers. He was able to identify over $690,000 of FY 82 O&M monies that was realigned to satisfy higher priority command requirements. While conducting mid- year reviews, a need to improve financial reporting was identified. A new system of management reports was started that provided financial information to decision makers on a more timely basis. The Operations and Maintenance (0&M) program grew from $49,700,000 in FY 82 to $82,200,000 in FY 83 as a result of additional program responsibilities witnin three areas -- Intelligence Data Handling Systems (IDHS), the Cobra Judy Project, and Operational Test and Evaluation (OT&E) programs. The FY 83 FP was submitted to Headquarters USAF Budget Division on 19 May, and was successfully defended by AFIS budget personnel at the Air Force OBRC in June.89 In September, the AFIS Budget Branch directed the year end close-out for FY 82. This exercise involved $50,171,000 and coordination with 12 host AFO's worldwide. AFIS experienced a highly successful close-out with 99.9 percent of all funding productively used. Table i-5 provides a summary of the AFIS CY 82 O&M program. Also in September, an Imprest Fund was established for AFIS. This fund enabled AFIS personne] to expedite the purchase of mission related, small purchase itens.90 = Tne branch completed the FY 83 distribution and reviewed individual programs in October. As a result of these reviews, three potential problems surfaced: civilian pay, rentals, and communications. Solutions for the problems included a special study to examine delays in filling vacant civilian positions; closer review of all future rental requirements; and emphasis to resource advisors concerning the need to program communications requirements into the Programmed Objectives Memorandum (POM) as early as possible.9l * Cobra Judy was a follow-on project to ARIS. Both projects involved monitoring Signals Intelligence (SIGINT), and were monitored by the Air Force Plans and Systems Directorate (AF/INY) at the Pentagon.
23 MATERIEL The AFIS Logistics Division (AFIS/LG) provided logistics support to all AFIS elements in the areas of facilities, supply, transportation, vehicle support, host-tenant support agreements, memorandums of understanding and all facets of logistics planning and policy guidance. It served as the AFIS Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR) for matters that pertained to planning, developing, formulating, presenting and substantiating logistics plans, programs, and concepts: controlled and provided the single point of contact to authorize command approval for host-tenant support agreements, command support agreements and other agreements/contracts between AFIS and outside organizations; took part in logistics planning support exercises for AFIS and USAF forces; assured logistics compatability of AFIS plans with Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS), USAF and other Major Command * The AFIS budget contained three major subdivisions known as Major force Programs (MFPs). These included MFP-3 (Air Force Intelligence Projects, Information Data Handling System (IBHS), Human Intelligence (HUMINT), and Operational and Security and Communications Management Requirements); MFP-8A (Attache and Soviet Affairs requirements); and MFP-9 (Headquarters Management and National Intelligence Systems to Support Tactical (NISSTR) Requirements). Deleted per 5 U.S.C. 352(b) (1) tow od
24 (MAJCOM) war and contingency plans; prepared, evaluated and monitored all mobility planning requirements, dispersal actions, and operating procedures for intratheater and intertheater support; provided single point of contact within AFIS for all facility matters, chaired the Facility Working Group and participated on the Facility Utilization Board; monitored air and surface movements of intelligence personnel and equipment during deployment and redeployment; and validated AFIS requirements for transportation support and monitored the AFIS motor pool fleet use and allocation. 93 2 The Logistics Division remained organized into two branches -~ the Plans Branch (LGX) and the Transportation Branch (L&T). The Plans Branch was responsible for all AFIS logistical planning with a primary focus on contingency wartime planning. The Transportation Branch managed the AFIS vehicle fleet.94 : On 1 October, Lieutenant Colonel Lynn Thompson became the Chief of the Division. He replaced Lieutenant Colonel Ronald Rush who retired. By the end of the year, the division was 100 percent manned with one officer and three enlisted personnel authorized and assigned. 95 i Plars to increase authorizations included one Logistics Plans Officer ‘First Lieutenant or Captain, AFSC 6624) for LGX and a Civilian secretary (GS-4). The new positions were validated by Air Force Directorate of Manpower and Organization (AF/MPM) in the FY 84 Programmed Objectives Memorandum (POM) submission but were not funded for allocation. Consequently, the request was resubmitted in the FY 85 POM, AFIS Comptroller (AFIS/AC} and Manpower and Organization (AFIS/MO) Divisions validated and authorized the secretarial position to be filled on an interim basis with a temporary hire person. The temporary hire was planned to be used for the FY 34 June to September time frame while awaiting permanent authorization. 96 S The Plans Branch reviewed and updated AFIS Operational Plans (OPLANsS) which provided intelligence logistical support to MAUCOMs for wartime contingencies. The primary problem involved coordination with MAJCOMS to provide and issue mobility bags and Chemical Warfare Defense Equipment required for deployment of Individual Mobilization Augmentees (IMAs) during wartime contingencies. In coordination with Headquarters Air Force Deputy Chief of Staff, Logistics and Engineering (AF/LE), it was agreed that MAJCOMs had the responsibi lity to issue required equipment. This procedure was being incorporated in all AFIS GPLANs during the annual’review/update cycle. By the end of the year, MAJCOMs had not formulated specific procedures on how and when this equipment would be issued to deploying IMAs, A listing of reviewed and updated plans is contained in Appendix 1v.97 ba The Plans Branch reviewed and or revised 17 Host Tenant Support Agreements (HTSA) and two Interservice Support Agreements (ISSA). A listing of these agreements is contained in Appendix V. There were no problems encountered in reviewing the HTSAs. All changes were minor jin nature and primarily focused on changes to enhance existing administrative support.
& A major problem was encountered during the renewal of the Fort Belvoir ISSA. As a result of a suggestion (AF Form 1000) by - Master Sergeant John Howard (AFIS/LGX), the Fort Belvoir/DEH was requested tc review the computations which established the reimburseable charges AFIS payed for services and support of facilities located at Fort Belvoir. The reimburseable expenses for supply, laundry, community = services, housing, real property maintenance, engineering support, fire protection, entomology, resource management, accounting and finance, and safety were reduced by a total amount that resulted in an annual savings to AFIS of $137,000. Sergeant Howard was given a cash award of $3,889.00 from the Air Force for his outstanding, cost-saving suggestion. 99 Several facility projects were initiated or completed during 1982. New central heating systems were installed in buildings 1923, 1924, 1927 and 1930. The planning and engineering had been completed for installing heating systems in buildings 1925, 1926, 1928 and 1929 during FY 83. Long range plans were being developed to install central air conditioners in ali buildings that would have the new heating systems, 100 Construction started in November for a new Special na Compartmented Intelligence Facility (SCIF) for use by the Air Force Special Activities Center {AFSAC). The SCIF and associated equipment was designed to improve security, expand storage and improve the flow of sensitive classified intelligence material. The estimated completion date for the SCIF was May 1983,101 Plans had also been developed to upgrade the office areas of AFIS/INH (building 1923), AFSAC/INX (building 1924) and AFSAC/INO (building 1927). Upgrade primarily consisted of new ceilings, lighting, wali paneling, and wall partitions. S&S Preliminary planning began in October to examine the feasibility of constructing a new Air Force Intelligence facility at Bolling AFB, D.C. For planning purposes, General Bissell] decided that all AFIS and AFSAC organizations in the National Capito) Region, with the exception of those organizations colocated at the Pentagon, Washington Nava! Yard and National Security Agency, would occupy the new facility. It would require approximately 90,000 Square feet to accommodate AFIS organizations. The 76th Airlift Division (ALD) Civil Engineers at Andrews AFB, Maryland, estimated the new building would cost $7.35 million in FY 82 dollars. Colonel Thompson requested tentative approval from Headquarters Military Airlift Command (MAC) to ~ build this new facility at Bolling AFB. As of 31 December, the x decision from Headquarters MAC was pending further review of the <0 impact on support requirements from Bolling AFB. General Bissell wy decided that there would be no Military Construction Program proposal ‘ before FY 86 for this project. < & From 18 October to 5 November, Colonel Thompson augmented S the AFIS/IG team as a logistics inspector for a Management . Effectiveness Inspection of the os g
26 rhompson suggested Preview their waneme mission requirements — in an effort to revalidate the need for four tractor trailers. i , ; would save the Air Force $160,000. ee mee continued to review the suggestion and were sche decision in FY 83. * Management within the AFIS Transportation Branch (AFIS/LGT) primarily emphasized preventive maintenance, misuse of government vehicles and the consolidation cf transportation requests. AS a result, the AFIS vehicle fleet maintained a very high in-commission rate with minimum down time for repairs. The increased use of vehicles in 1982 served as the justification for Warner Robins Air Logistics Center (ALC) to authorize an additional vehicle for the AFIS fleet. The new vehicle was scheduled for delivery in FY 84 with the provision that if ALC had additional funds the vehicle would be ordered for delivery in FY 83. A current listing of the AFIS fleet is contained in Appendix vI.105 . In October 1982, a supply account was established between Headquarters AFIS and Fort Belvoir which allowed AFIS supply custodians to purchase items through the U.S. Army supply system. The Activity Code (FX5120) was established in accordance with 00D 4000.25D, Department of Defense Activity Address Directory (DODAAD) (AF-0124 System) and through coordination with Headquarters Air Force Logistics Command (AFLC). This new account eliminated the previous need for numerous supply trips to distant locations such as Bolling and Andrews AFBs. 196 SUPPORT ACTIVITIES rnd Five additional agencies provided support for AFIS. These included the Headquarters Squadron Section, the Administrative Division, the Inspector General, the Plans Division and Public Affairs. 107 Headquarters Squadron Section Throughout 1982, Senior Master Sergeant Larry I. Polk continued as the First Sergeant for AFIS. He directly supported First Lieutenant Terrence E. Giroux who assumed duty as the new Headquarters Squadron Section (HSS) Commander on 18 February.* Together, they managed and provided both administrative and personal support for AFIS people. Their responsibilities included counselling people on personal problems and disciplinary actions; conducting orientation briefings for new members; monitoring unit administrative activities; visiting members who were hospitalized; scheduling psychological * Lieutenant Giroux also served as the Executive Officer for the AFIS Chief of Staff (AFIS/CS) and Vice Commander (AFIS/CV), located at Fort Belvoir.
27 evaluations; administerina non-judicial punishment (Article 15s) and letters of reprimand; and providing orderly room support to the Commander of AFSAC. 108 The Unit Administrative Section monitored the military leave program; administered the Individualized Newcomer Treatment and Orientation (INTRO) program; administered the Weighted Airman Promotion System (WAPS) testing program; prepared duty rosters for Fort Belvoir and Bolling Air Force Base (AF8); prepared and processed requests for subsistance, prepared separate rations and issued meal cards; administered the unit promotion program; and prepared personne} status reports and processed personnel rosters in support of the immunization, dental, physical, records review, quality force, locator, alpha, good conduct medal and Air Force longevity programs, 109 The Unit Training Section administered the on-the-job (0JT) training program; scheduled training and requests for career development courses; scheduled trainees for testing and administered volume review examinations; maintained OJT rosters; monitored the unit professional military education program; ang administered the unit physical fitness and weight control program, 119 During the year, the HSS supported all AFIS and AFSAC personnel, totalling approximately 665 military people. It maintained liaison with the servicing CBPO and Accounting and Finance Office (Bolling AFB), three Judge Advocate's Offices (Fort Belvoir, and Andrews and Bolling AFBs), two housing offices (Fort Belvoir and Bolling AFB), and two military police offices (Fort Belvoir and Bolling AFB). All AFIS members assigned to the Pentagon were serviced “by that organization. 11 During 1982, the HSS Commander and First Sergeant processed one articie 15 and one letter of reprimand; counselled and took appro- priate action on approximately 18 people for traffic violations; counselled 15 people on incident and complaint reports; counselled and assjsted approximately 35 people on personal matters; assisted four people to resolve dormitory problems at Fort Belvoir and Bolling AFB where AFIS personnel were assigned; and counselled eight individuals on bad checks and indebtedness. Other actions included referring two individuals to the mental health clinic -- one retained and one released from AFIS -- and the enrollment of two people in the Alcohol Rehabi litation Program. . The orderly room issued 2,358 leave authorization numbers to AFIS and AFSAC personnel; monitored the INTRO program for 105 people; maintained duty rosters and AF Form 219 (Record of Duty) for the “Out- side Grounds" and "Classified Waste Burn" details for AFIS and AFSAC personne] located at Fort Belvoir; maintained a Bolling AFB detail roster; notified al] AFIS and AFSAC personnel on required physical and dental examinations and required immunizations; issued meal cards for three people and processed AF Form 220 (Request Authorization for Pay Order BAS) for appreximately 43 people; processed 13 MAC Form 17's
28 (Application for Off-Duty Employment); maintained (on a continuing basis) all lawn equipment for the Fort Belvoir compound; and notified personnel of various reviews, appointments and training.113 ® As indicated earlier, the Unit Training Section monitored several areas inciuding annual physical fitness training, the weight control program, and the OJT and promotion programs. No failures were reported for the annual physical fitness test in 1982; however, 11 members were identified and placed on the weight control program. A total of 20 enlisted people entered OJT for the next higher skill (proficiency) level and 50 airmen were selected for promotion. Administrative Division The Administrative Division (AFIS/DA) provided systems, services, resources, and procedures for the processing of information. This was accomplished through three major areas: policy, program management and operations. Administration policy involved the management of systems, resources, programs, and procedures necessary for the life cycle of documented information used by AFIS. This information took all forms, such as paper, microform, and electronic. It included correspondence, messages, reports, forms, publications, plans, budgets, orders, maps, charts, photographs, etc. Adminis- trative program management was concerned with the development of concepts and systems using new and emerging methods and technology. This included continuing systematic efforts to critically examine manual and automated administration systems for possible improvements, and the application of new techniques, equipment, and interface with other systems. Administration operations involved people, money, materiel, facilities, and services. They were customer-service oriented, and consisted of offices, centers, facilities and specialized capabilities designed to satisfy all functional requirements. Essentially, DA supported the AFIS mission by reviewing and modifying administration support, systems, services, resources, and controls, to improve performance and meet changing requirements; evaluating and exploiting new methods and technology to improve administration and the management process; minimizing the information holdings and paperwork burden on all AFIS activities and the public; ensuring the timely processing and dissemination of Air Force policies and procedures in publications, correspondences, and other media; coordinating on systems development to ensure a multi-disciplinary approach was taken and total office information and administration support requirements were considered; and provided professional training opportunities, including administration and support training programs conducted by government, industry, and professional associa- tions. 116 Fs) The division continued to be divided into four major sub- branches. These included Administrative Communications (AFIS/DAA); Publications Management (AFIS/DAP); Documentation Management (AFIS/DAD); and a Pentagon Support Branch (AFIS/DAU). The fourth branch was inactivated on 1 April. Its functions were transferred to
AFIS/INSA along with two DA authorized positions. The third DAU posi- tion was transferred to the AFIS Logistics Division (AFIS/LG). Excluding the DAU branch, overall DA manning authorizations included nine enlisted and four civilians (total of 13) with eight enlisted and four civilians assigned (total of 12). The division had an operating budget of $48,300 for the fiscal year (FY). By the end of FY82, al] funds were obligated. Table 1-6 provides a summary of DA expenses. TABLE 1-6 AFIS/DA EXPENSES FY82 CATEGORY EXPENDITURES Per Diem & Incidental Expenses - Mission $ 400 Rental of Other Equipment 27,600 Purchase Maintenance of Equipment 6,400 Miscellaneous Contract Services 1,300 Supplies Air Force Stock Funds OO 2,200 Other Supplies Non-Air Force Stock Funds 3,300 Other Equipment Non-Air Force Stock Funds 7,100 TOTAL $48, 300 The Administrative Communications Branch (AFIS/DAA) developed and implemented policies and procedures for preparing and using administrative communications and telecommunications. The branch ensured all distribution systems within AFIS were adequate, correcting known discrepancies and making recommendations where - required. The AFIS Base Information Transfer Center (BITC) at Fort Belvoir received 2,073 pieces of incoming registered mail and sent out 2,212. Tne staff distribution office received 25,200 and sent 5,100 Classified and unclassified messages. The total postage expenditure for 1982 was $35,210. AFIS/DAA also interfaced with the Air Staff and Bolling AFB distribution systems through the AFIS/LG courier. AFIS/LG retained the responsibility for courier service to the Pentagon and Bolling AFB from Fort Belvoir with AFIS/DAA as the backup. Although tasked by Air Force directives, AFIS/DA was used only for expertise in the area of Documentation Security. The AFIS Director of Security and Communications Management {AFIS/INS) developed administrative policies. and procedures for accountability and control of classified communications and document security functions. AFIS/DAA performed as Top Secret Control Officer (TSCOQ) for AFIS units at Fort Belvoir and processed 68 Top Secret documents. On 5 November, the AFIS Plans Division (AFIS/XP) and History Office (AFIS/HO) created separate Top Secret Control Accounts (TSCAs) with TSCOs appointed. bead AFIS/DA was the custodian for Communications Security (COMSEC with three sub-accounts. The account had three KY-3 secure phones with keying material. Senior Master Sergeant Deleted per $ U.S.C. 352(b) (1)
Rufus L. Setliff (Chief of the Publishing Branch) served as the COMSEC account custodian. Master Sergeant George Whiteside (Chief of the Administrative Communications Branch) assumed the duty on 30 October due to the retirement of Sergeant Setliff. The COMSEC account was inspected by AFIS/INS who performed as the monitoring headquarters in April. During August, AFIS/INS was designated the Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR) for communications security for AFIS and monitoring headquarters for COMSEC Qa. 120 & AFIS/DAA composed and authenticated all special temporary duty (IDY) orders for personnel at Fort Belvoir. The TOY orders for AFIS elements at Bolling AFB (except for the AFIS Operational Intelligence (INO) elements} were authenticated by the host DA. AFIS/INO and AFIS elements at the Pentagon were authenticated by the 1947th Administrative Support Group (ASG). The AFSAC/Det 21 and AFIS/INOI were authorized to authenticate their own orders. AFIS/DAA issued 336 T-series orders, five G-series orders, and 22 reserve orders in 1982.12] eS At Fort Belvoir, DAA submitted nine telephone work orders -- three for new installations, four relocations, ind two miscellaneous actions. All were completed as requested. Tne U. S. Army Com- munications Command (USACC) for Fort Belvoir surveyed cables leading into the administrative building (#1923). As a result of this survey, it was determined that the cables leading to buildings 1919 through 1930 should be replaced with underground cables. The project was called the "1900 Area Project" and was scneduled to be completed during 1983.122 The Publications Management Office (AFIS/DAP) accomplished timely and cost effective development, issuance, and maintenance cf quality publications which contained essential guidance and informa- tion to accomplish the AFIS mission. The Command Publications Manager ensured that all publications were available when needed, were accurate, were logically organized, and were written in 2a@.-clear uncluttered way. During 1982, 38 AFIS publications were published for a total of 75 publications in effect for the command. In addition, eight Air Force Intelligence Operational instructions (INOIs) were published, 123 GBB othe AFIS/DAP Forms Management Office created 24 new AFIS forms. This brought the total of AFIS forms within the command to 46. The distribution of ali AFIS publications and forms, Air Force Head- quarters Operating Instructions (HOIs) and other selected publications was accomplished by the AFIS Command Publications Distribution Center (CPDC). AFIS/DAP published weekly bulletins announcing new or revised publications and forms. From responses to these bulletins, the CPDC was able to keep requirements up-to-date and make timely distri- bution. og As the Printing Control Gffice for AFIS, DAP monitored funds for the printing of various publications produced in AF/IN and AFIS for Air Force wide distribution. These printing requirements were fully coordinated with the OPRs to ensure budgeting for ali «known and . 252(b) (Lp ‘Peleted pers. i
projected requirements. Throughout 1982, DAP did not have publica- tions on fiche or microfilm. The mumber and length of AFIS publications made this form of production less cost effective than conventional hardcopy printing. = AFIS/DAP reprographics met all duplicating requirements within AF/IN and AFIS. The AFIS duplicating facility at Fort Belvoir produced 444,120 pages of duplication and collated 65,000 of them. Other reprographic services were provided through the Fort Beivoir printing plant, the Pentagon print plant, and the Bolling AFB duplicating facility. The AFIS copy machine manager monitored 19 copiers within AFIS -- 16 rental machines and three owned. A total of 6,898,250 copies were produced during the year at a total cost of $113,330. AFIS/DA approved two word processors for rental in 1982 and eight word processors that were previously approved for rental were purchased. On 11 December, Headquarters AFIS established an Office of Information Systems Management Team. This team provided management and gui dance for Office Information Systems Management (01S) within AFIS. @ The Freedom of Information Act program received a total of 60 requests for information. The Administrative Division completed the processing of 55 of these requests with 13 denied in part or whole. Two appeals from denials were received. The total costs to administer the program for the year amounted to $12,307.12 In the Privacy Act program, DA identified a total of 24 separate, distinct systems of record within AFIS. Counting multiple occurences of these systems, the grand total for AFIS was 102. Seven of these were unique to AFIS. System F205 AFIS A, Sensitive Compart- mented Information Personnel Security Records, was granted exemption from portions of the Privacy Act to protect the identity of sources to whom promises of confidentiality had been made. The following statistics were reported to Headquarters USAF/DA on requests received: 16 for System F03501 MPC B, Effectiveness/Performance Reporting " System, and 40 for System F205 AFIS A, Sensitive Compartmented Infor- mation Personnel Security Records.12 a& During the year, documentation staff assistance visits were made to each of the 36 AFIS offices of record located in the Washington Metropolitan area. Reports of findings were issued sub- sequent to each visit with the results consolidated into an informal report. The Command Documentation Program reported the following statistics for AFIS as of 31 December: 85 cubic feet of Top Secret; 1,716 cubic feet of Secret; and 677 cubic feet of Unclassified on hand {total of 2,478 cubic feet). A total of 1,636 cubic feet of classified material was destroyed. 129 @B from 5-16 April, AFIS/DA augmented the AFIS/IG inspection team which evaluated the effectiveness and efficiency of aD Administrative team members inciuded SMSgt Setlit Hiloree Corte. SD .:: 3s CT however, not ali steps in the publication development process were being followed. The QD was rated aap. 130
(U) During the period 18 October through 5 November, Mrs. This unit was rated inspector General @ The AFIS Inspector General (AFIS/IG) function was established in 1980 to assist. in improving the management effectiveness of AFIS staff elements and subordinate AFIS units through the use of the inspection system. The inspection system con- sisted primarily of Management Effectiveness Inspections (MEIs), a strong self-inspection program of Headquarters AFIS staff elements including over-the-shoulder evaluations by AFIS/IG, and intelligence oversight inspections conducted under the provisions of AFR 123-3, Intelligence Oversight, and AFR 200-19, Restrictions on Foreign Intelligence Activities. In addition to inspections, the IG performed other Inspector Genera! functions as directed by AFR 20-68, Inspector General Activities. As the Inspector General (IG), Lieutenant Colonel C. Wayne Burridge acted as a management advisor to the Commander, AFIS, for all" command activities. In this capacity, he was responsible for the optimum effectiveness of the AFIS inspection, safety, investigative, and complaint programs, and for providing assistance to ensure that AFIS resources were effectively and efficiently managed to help sustain Air Force peacekeeping and fighting capabilities. To accomplish these responsibilities, the IG division developed AFIS inspection policies, procedures, and criteria; identified problems impeding the effective accomplishment of the AFIS mission and provided recommended corrective actions; programmed inspection of AFIS elements and established inspection team composition; initiated action to effect inspection team travel and other necessary arrangements; obtained data pertinent to the conduct of éach inspection from AFIS staff elements, and disseminated the results of inspections to the activity inspected and appropriate AFIS staff elements for information and comment; inspected subordinate units on a recurring basis; served as a focal point for the AFIS self- inspection program; conducted over-the-shoulder evaluations of self- inspections conducted by AFIS staff elements on a selective basis; ensured that AFIS inspections .adequately tested and accurately reported the management effectiveness of inspected units; reviewed and analyzed the results of inspections and ensured that all actions required as a result of inspections were completed; interfaced AFIS inspection results and trends with Headquarters Air Force Inspection and Safety Center (HG/AFISC), Norton AF8, CA, and other MAJCOM and SOA IGs; supervised and monitored the Inspector General Complaint System (AFR 123-11) within AFIS; conducted administrative investigations and inquiries according to AFR 120-3; ensured the existence of an effective intelligence oversight program within AFIS in accordance with AFR 123-3, Intelligence Oversight, and AFR 200-19, Restrictions on Foreign Intelligence Operations, and submitted quarterly intelli- gence oversight reports *o Headquarters AFISC; served as AFIS focal
point for the USAF fraud, waste, and abuse program; developed AFIS ground safety policies and procedures; and evaluated AFIS unit safety programs and activities in order to conserve resources through accident prevention. & The IG continued to operate as a separate AFIS element reporting directly to the Commander, AFIS. Manpower authorizations in 1982 included two officers (one Lieutenant Colonel - Inspector General; one Major - Inspector) and one noncommissioned officer (Staff Sergeant - Administrative). A Senior Master Sergeant (E-8) billet, which had been occupied by MSgt Robert D. Todd, was declared surplus to AFIS/IG functional needs on 7 April. On 20 December, by direction of General Bissell, a vacant Major's billet (AFSC 8016 with electronic warfare background desired) was transferred from AFIS/IG to provide a resource to the Air Force Planning Division (AF/INYX) to support the Joint Tactical Fusion Program. Expenditures for AFIS/IG during 1982 included $18,726 for travel and per diem and $2,057.90 for equipment and supplies.235 2 Management Effectiveness Inspections (MEIs) were conducted at S subordinate organizations every 18-24 months. These inspections, conducted according to AFR 123-1, Tne Inspection System, examined all aspects of the activity's function. This included inspecting organizational leadership and management, as reflected in mission and functional area performance, installation support, people programs, service to customers, and liance with directives. During 1982, MEIs were conducted at the (RRR Overall, ‘all MEIs conducted in 1982 were rated @ | During the AFIS/IG MEI o personnel from Headquarters, Air orc Inspection and Safety Center/Intelligence Inspection Division (Ho AFISC/IGQi), Norton AFB, California, conducted an over- the-shoulder inspection (GTSI) of the AFIS/IG team as it performed its MEI. ‘to findings surfaced during the OTSI. The Headquarters AFISC/IGQi inspectors cbserved preinspection preparation, conduct of the MEI, report preparation, and the outbriefing. Overall, the Headquarters AFISC/IGQI inspectors were favorably impressed with the AFIS team's technical competence and professionalism. Intelligence oversight was monitored by AFIS/IG to ensure compliance with Executive Order (£0) 12333, United States Intelligence Activities. The IG performed this task during MEIs by observing unit activities governed by the £0; Department of Defense Regulation 5240.1-R, Procedures Governing the Activities of DOD Intelligence Components That Affect United States Persons; AFR 123-3, Intelligence Oversight; and AFR 200-19, Restrictions on Foreign Intelligence Activities. During 1982, oversight inspections were conducted during MEIs at AFSAC and the ESAA. Reports of oversight activities were
34 prepared by AFIS/IG each quarter and forwarded to HQ AFISC/IGQI according to AFR 123-3, Intelligence Oversight. These reports listed current activities and proposed future inspections. No activities that raised questions of legality or propriety were detected or reported during 1982.138 Over~the-Shoulder Inspections (OTSIs) were inspections performed by inspectors from AFIS/IG to evaluate the effectiveness of an AFIS organization's self-inspection program. The evaluation included mission-oriented inspection standards, checklist utilization, and team management. AFIS organizations receiving OTSIs during 1982 a inspections were rated A-_— with the exception of mB which was rated & Numerous complaints were investigated by the IG during 1982. Que to the privileged, personal nature of the information contained in these complaints, copies of investigation reports were not included in this history. However, complete files on the complaints were maintained in AFIS/IG. Areas of complaint and inquiry included: selection procedures for Squadron Officers School; secondary zone promotions in AFIS; alleged misuse of computer training; misclassification of duty position; lack of access to personal data; delay in processing Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) clearance; termination of SCI investigation; maximum civilian grade levels in the Human Resource Intelligence (HUMINT) career field; and overseas tour length. 149 The IG also conducted the Air Force Fraud, Waste, and Abuse (FW&A) prevention and detection program within AFIS. An AF/IN-AFIS policy letter was prepared to institute the program. In conjunction with this program, AFIS/IG publicized the program by placing notices in the AFIS Weekly Bulletin each quarter advising AFIS members of the opportunity to report suspected FW&A to AFIS/IG for investigation. During 1952, the division also distributed FW&A crossfeed information from the Headquarters Air Force Inspection and Safety Center (HQ/AFISC) to all AFIS elements, as well as Preparing and distributing an AFIS FW&A poster to all AFIS elements. Monthly reports on AFIS FW&A prevention activities were submitted to Headquarters AFISC/IGF. During 1982, six FWRA conference periods were held in conjunction with METS of subordinate AFIS organizations. No FWRA disclosures were received through these conferences. 141 One case of alleged FW&A was referred to AFIS/IG for investigation. The case involved an allegation that an AFIS lieutenant was fraudulently receiving basic allowances for quarters (BAQ) at a with-dependent rate when he had no dependents living with him. Because the case involved fraud, the investigation was turned over to the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) by the AFIS/IG. The subsequent AFOSI investigation did not substantiate the allegation. Due to the Privileged nature of these files, supporting documentation was not attached to this history; however, the files were maintained in AFIS/I9G.142
AFIS/IG was charged by General Bissell to manage all aspects of the AFIS grounc safety prograt. This included the implementation of AFR 127-2 (The US Air Force Mishap Prevention Program), AFR 127-4 (Investigating and Reporting US Air Force Mishaps), and AFR 127-12 (Air Force Occupational Saftey and Health Programs). Additionally, AFIS/I1G prepared seasonal safety letters for the Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence and the AFIS Commander and prepared and distributed ground safety information to all AFIS elements. Close coordination was maintained between AFIS/IG and the Safety Offices at Bolling Air Force Base and, the Pentagon. Table 1-7 provides a ground accident summary for 1982.143 TABLE 1-7 GROUND ACCIDENT SUMMARY TYPE ACCIDENT INJURY /DAMAGE DAYS LOST COST PMV of SMSot rear-ended Back strain 2. $ 240 by civilian car; off- duty (13 Aug 82) Capt injured playing Back strain 2 $ 340 touch football; off- duty (24 Sep 82) Fire escape landing on Multiple injuries 11 $2295 second floor fell with CMSgt and MSgt; on-duty (6 Dec 82) _ Plans Division The AFIS Plans Division (AFIS/XP) continued to review and revise support plans for other Major Commands (MAJCOMs) which AFIS elements supported in wartime.* AFIS plans were reviewed with particular attention paid to adequate description and use of AFIS war- fighting capabilities within operational and contingency plans and development and refinement of these capabilities in exercise plans. This emphasis responded directly to Headquarters USAF's Project Warrior, and served to help optimize AFIS capabilities in spite of fiscal constraints. In keeping with this trend, the division partici- pated in the planning and conduct of Proud Saber 83, a Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) mobilization exercise held in November. Participation in Proud Saber allowed evaluation of: the AFIS role within the overall JUCS/USAF Emergency Action System as well as the utility of several AFIS contingency plans. 144 * Appendix VII contains a list of sianificant publications and events which occurred in the Plans Division during 1982. For additional information on Proud Saber 83, see chapter III, page 77 of this history.
36 = Long-range planning continued to be an item of hiah interest throughout the Air Force. Accordingly, the Plans Division reviewed and amended the AFIS Objective Plan to more accurately define the various AFIS capabilities and roles including those functions where AFIS was in support of operational commands (in peacetime as well as wartime). Participation by the division in the AFIS fiscal plannning and programming cycle increased substantially in 1982. Division personnel played a key role in managing compilation and amalgamation of data inputs for both the Program Objective Memorandum (POM) and the General Defense Intelligence Program (GDIP). The expanded role of XP in these processes proved valuable in correlating budgetary plans with both short- and long-range operational plans. 146 . The Plans Division continued to be divided into two major subdivisions throughout 1982. These included the Plans Branch and the Programs Branch. Manning authorizations remained unchanged with a total of three officers and five civilians. Lieutenant Colonel Alden R. Guy continued as Division Chief. As command focal point for exercise activities, AFIS/XP was involved in pre-exercise planning activities for several major exercises, including Ulchi-Focus Lens, Team Spirit, Gallant Eagle, Wintex-Cimex, and Pressure Point. The year's major exercise-related effort, however, involved participation by selected AFIS elements in the JCS-sponsored Command Post Exercise (CPX) Proud Saber 83 during the period 25 October to 5 November. This was preceded by months of preparation and planning dating back as far as Seotember 1981. On 27- 28 July, representatives of the Manpower (AFIS/MO) and Plans (AFIS/XP) divisions attended a Proud Saber manpower Dianning conference at Andrews AFB, Maryland. Exercise briefinas were subsequently provided to the AFIS Command Group on 2 and 5 August. Proud Saber evaluated the Emergency Action Procedures and mobilization and recall plans and capabilities of all participating MAJCOMs, SOAs, and other agencies. Preliminary evaluation of the results of the CD2X began immediately upon its completion on 5 November. 4 final report was published on 15 December, and it praised tne utility of the exercise while pointing out both noteworthy shortcomings and praiseworthy capabilities within AFIS. AFIS participation in Proud Saber 33 was particularly note- worthy for the foilowing reasons: (1) it marked the first formal involvement by AFIS command, staff, and functional elements in a major JCS-sponsored exercise; (2} it produced the first AFIS exercise plan; the first formal AFIS input to a Headquarters USAF exercise plan; and the first comprehensive AFIS after-actian report on exercise partici- pation; and (3) it entailed the first comprehensive test of AFIS emergency action procedures, including the command emergency notifica- tion system; command response to increased readiness requirements; the role of the AFIS Alert Staff in Providing emergency support to the AFIS Command Group; and an in-depth evaluation of command emergency readiness requirements, 142
37 Durine the period 2-5 February, Mr. Charles £. Beal, Plans Branch, performed a TOY assistance visit to Headquarters PACAF/INYX at Hickam AFB, Hawaii. The purpose of his visit was to establish a work- ing relationship with PACAF plans personnel and to resolve planning probiems related to the twos commands' Operation Plans (OPLANs). Colonel Guy believed the visit was quite successful and provided valuable insights into PACAF's operations and problems, 15 In March 1992, AFIS/XP hosted the third in a series of TAC- AFIS intercommand planning workshops in a continuing effort to improve contingency and wartime support to operational commands. Representa- tives from TAC/IN visited Fort Belvoir to discuss intelligence aug- mentation requirements and associated logistics support requirements with representatives from a number of AFIS and AFSAC functional elements. This workshop resulted in the formulation of a draft Memo- randum of Agreement among AFIS, TAC, and Headquarters Rapid Deployment Air Force Forces (RDAFFOR)* which was designed to update and clarify provisions of previous agreements which TAC/IN had concluded with the > 7602nd Air Ircelligence Group and AFIS intelligence reserve program managers. This workshop and associated actions provided substantial groundwork for a number of other planning efforts, including: (1) establishment of AFIS active and reserve force manpower packages dedi- cated to support TAC elements, the Air Force component of the Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force, and Air Force components of several other joint/combined commands; (2) follow-up actions on items discussed at USAF Senior Intelligence Office (SIO) conferences heid in 1981 and 1982; and (3) AFIS review and recommended inputs to a new TAC requia- tion on mobi lization planning. In response to an April tasking from General Bissell, the Plans Division polled the AFIS staff for inputs regarding the proposed establishment of AFIS Functional Intelligence Augmentation Teams (FIATS}. The FIATs were teams of AFIS experts in specific areas of intelligence activity who would augment undermanned field organiza- tions worldwide during wartime and or times of crisis. The concept involved teams of specialists such as targeteers or area specialists deploying during a contingency to a field command. The FIATS and particular FIAT members/positions were identified and incorporated via manpower packages into the AFIS CONPLAN and other appropriate planning documents. The year also marked a concerted effort to increase security awareness within the division, as well as throughout AFIS. Security policies and practices addressed by the Plans Division included: (1) a review of Top Secret contro} procedures at the Fort Belvoir compound, resultina in the establishment of a new Top Secret account to serve AFIS/XP; (2) establishment of two new Sensitive Compartmented Intelligence (SCI) billets within AFIS/XP; (3) implementation of new security guidance contained in revisions of DOD 5200.1/AFR 205-1; and (4) review cf reauirements for increased physical. security measures within building T-1930 at the Fort Belvoir compound. * The Air Force component of the Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force (RDJTF).
38 Various inspections and staff assistance visits were accomp- lished during 1982. Mr. Beal augmented the AFIS/IG Inspectio Management Effectiveness Inspection of @ Bin April anda the IG MEI inspection of (im Fduring October and November, 104 On 11 July, Mr. Earl G. Gongloff, AFIS Plans Branch, visited “Site R" at Fort Ritchie, Maryland to personally update the Manpower Force Packaging (MANFOR) system data base in the Contingency Operati ong’ Mobility Planning and Execution System (COMPES) maintained by the Air Force Wartime Manpower and Personnel Readiness Team (AFWMPRT). The MANFOR was a subsystem of the Manpower and Equipment Force Packaging System (MEFPAK), which provided detailed planning data such as: (1) the title of the unit or force element and its unique JCS Unit Type Code (UTC); (2) the Comparability Statement that contained the defini- tion of unit comparability; and (3) the manpower detail by function, grade, and AFSC required to meet the defined capability, 155 Mr. Gongloff again visited "Site R" at Fort Ritchie on 15-17 November to attend the FY83 Support Force Sizing Exercise (FORSIZE) Time Phased Force Deployment Data Refinement Conference. His attendance was requested by the Headquarters USAF intelligence functional OPR (AF/INYX) in order to utilize his expertise in the use of intelligence Unit Type Codes (UTCs) as used in area operational plans Time Phased Force Deployment Data (TPFDD). FORSIZE was an annual methodological procedure used to develop Requirement Plans (RPs) and associated wartime manpower requirements to maintain combat force mission effectiveness. The TPFDD included a Time Phased Force List which identified units to be deployed, their origins, ports of embarkation and debarkation, destinations and priorities. The Plan's Division participation in the programming and budgeting functions within AFIS increased in 1982. Program Objective Memorandum (POM) submission compilation activities for the FY85-89 POM/Budget began in September. The Plans, Comptroller and Manpower divisions co-hosted a working-level meeting on 30 September to review data call instructions. Data submissions were received and reviewed in October. The command ranking of FY85 POM initiatives by the AFIS Financial Working Group (FWG) began on 10 November. The Financia} Management Board (FMB) concurred in the established ranking, and the confirmation letter was signed by General Bissell on 20 November. On 13. December, the data call for the FY85-89 General Defense Intelligence Program Proposal (GDIPP) was received and distributed to the AFIS staff, with recipients tasked to provide their data to Mrs. Carlice Bourassa, Programs Branch, not later than 10 January 1983, 157 On 1 December, temporary Programs Branch member Major Paul Munninghoff began producing the exercise plan for Ridge Runner 83 -- the third annual AFIS/INR-sponsored evasion exercise. The exercise, scheduled for September 1983 at Camp Dawson, West Virginia, would pro- vide tra°aing and practice in evasion principles for personnel from all four U.S. armed services, from several reserve and national guard units, and from several NATO armed forces. An outline and partial draft were submitted to the AFIS Directorate of Evasion, Escape, and C7
39 Prisoner of War Division (AFIS/IN2) in mid-December, with publication expected in March 1983, 152 The Plans Division also used the services of three Air Force Intel Mgence Reserve (AFIR) members on two-week annual tours of duty during the year. Major Barrie A. Gillis performed during the period 10-21 May, generating a preiiminary analysis of the Plans Division interface with numerous Air Force and Joint data automation systems containing data essential to the AFIS planning and execution process. From 7-18 June, Major Charles J. Gross reviewed and rewrote the AFIS plan supporting Air Defense Center (ADC, formerly Air Defense Command) OPLANs. Finally, Chief Master Sergeant Horace Danner, during the period 21 June to 2 July, completed a major project to identify requirements for Air Force Intelligence Reserve personnel under the 190,000-person Executive Recall Authority. Public Affairs The AFIS Public Affeirs Office (AFIS/PA) advised directors and staff chiefs on public affairs matters; developed plans and managed internal and external information programs, including hometown news releases, speakers bureau, various obriefinas and quarterly commander's call information packages; provided information to public and government agencies on request; prepared and coordinated responses to media queries; arranged interviews and photographs for print media representatives; performed as editor of the AFIS newspaper; performed additional duty as headquarter's staff photographer; and assisted the Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence (ACS/I) on internal information programs. Prior to 1982, the AFIS Public Affairs function was performed on a part-time basis. - In October 1981, the AFIS Manpower and Organization Division requested a full-time enlisted public affairs specialist position, Air Force Specialty Code 791XX. The Air Force Manpower and Personnel Center (AFMPC) approved the request and on 12 February, Technical Seraeant Barry L. Bahler assumed duty as the first full-time public affairs representative for AFIS. 161 Initial actions by Sergeant Bahler included the estabiishment of the Public Affairs office and programs according to AFR 190-1, Public Affairs Policies, Procedures and Guidelines. General Bissel] fully Supported the new program. He summarized his views when he stated: 162 . The Public Affairs program will concentrate on improving information flow, both internal and external, for the benefit of our personnel and the communities in which we live and work. Concurrently, we will work hard at enhancing the image of the Air Force intelligence community and the men and women who serve within it. This will be accomplished through the development of the three major PA functions: community relations, media relations, and an
40 internal program that will be broad based and will include, amongst other thinas, a family oriented news/activities letter. * During May, PA submitted a request to the Air Force Service Information and News Center, Products Division (AFSINC/IIBP) for approval to write, edit and design an AFIS newspaper. The request was approved and work began to produce the first official AFIS newspaper, The Intelligencer. The first edition was printed and dispatched in August. Subsequent editions were produced on a monthly basis. During October, Public Affairs developed the initial concept of featuring an AF/IN or AFIS Directorate each month. It was an internal program whereby each Directorate could tell their own story. In December, the Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence (ACS/I), Major General John B. Marks, provided an editorial for the newspaper. This represented 2 significant milestone since it introduced the first Air Staff involvement in The Intelliaencer, 16 Other significant PA activities during thé year inc luded publication of the input to AFISR 23-1, Organization and Function; production of the first Productivity Plan; preparation of a command briefing with slides; development of a program so all 58 Air Attaches would receive the Commanders' Public Affairs Desk Reference and the Air Force Theme Book with yearly updates for each book; coordination of two briefings and briefers for the Defense Intelligence Schoo] Postgraduate Program; and forwarding of a news release and photos to Air Force Manpower for use in their yearly magazine.+ Be In June, intensive work began in preparation for the AFIS 10th Anniversary Celebration held at Fort Belvoir. Public Affairs developed a program for the official function, arranged for the USAF Band and Honor Guard participation and developed the speaker's book for Generals Marks and Bissell and Colonel Jack Morris. Public Affairs aiso provided publicity support for the annual Air Force Association Convention held in Washinston 9.C. and was the Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR: for the Air Force's 35th Anniversary Celebration in September. Support was provided to the Bolling AFB Public Affairs office to help them develop and coordinate the Washington, D.C. celebration. 265 * PAR chose to oublish a newspaper instead of a "news/activities letter". General Bissell concurred. *
4] CHATTER TI INTELLIGENCE SUPPORT S Four directorates provided intelliaence support for Air Force Intelligence (AF/IN) and Air Force Intelligence Service (AFIS) activities. These included Operational Intelligence (AFIS/INO), Target Intelligence (AFIS/INT), Intelligence Data Management (AFIS/IND) and Security and Communications Management (AFIS/INS) .1 OPERATIONAL INTELLIGENCE re The Directorate of Operational Intelligence (AFIS/INO) provided the Air Force with all-source intelligence that pertained to or affected U.S. Air Force policies, resources, mission, or force deployment, on a worldwide basis. Specific examples included analysis of indications of potential hostile activities aaqainst the U.S. or its allies; intelligence analysis of current air operations; trends and implications of current worldwide deployments; evaluation of aerospace © related sianal intelligence (SIGINT) to determine capabilities, vulnerabilities, and trends of foreign aerospace forces; and liaison with other services and Department of Defense (00D) and non-DOD government agencies on matters that pertained to operational intelligence and SIGINT evaluation. Sianificant Management Issues ®@ At the beginning of 1982, Colonel Willian B. Sherman was Director, providing dynamic leadershin until 1 October, when he was selected to become the AFIS Vice Commander. He was replaced by Colonel Arnoid L. Mabile. 8efore becomina Director, Colonel Mabile " was Chief, Weanons, Space and Technology Division (AF/INET). He was detailed by Major Generz] John B. Marks, Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence (ACS/1) to continue to act in that capacity. The directorate did not have a deputy.director position. @ The major mission and organizational change during 1982 was the divestiture of the Target Intelligence Division (AFIS/INOT), its personnel (22 authorized), and most of its responsibilities as a result of an AFIS reorganization in August. The division was upgraded to a separate directorate (AFIS/INT).* The transition was effected very smoothly. In February, a new analytical element, designated INOX, was established to focus on the growing problems of international terrorism and related issues. The element consisted of two officer (Captain, 9-3) authorizations which were realigned from AFIS/INOZB (AF/INER). Although INOX continued through the end of the year, it was disestablished in January 1983. Its manpower authorizations and responsibilities were assumed by the Regional Estimates Division (AF /INER).9 * For additional information, see the section on Target Intelli- gence within this chapter.
42 In April, a new element, the Special Activity Applications Group (AFIS/INOH), was established to better integrate Human Intelligence (HUMINT) into the Air Staff estimative and current intelligence processes.6 ard Although an AFIS directorate, AFIS/INO was under the operational control of the Director cf Estimates (AF/INE). This configuration generally worked quite well, enhancing the management flexibility and mission effectiveness of both directorates. However, some problems were experienced because of the dual chains of command, generally because some AFIS elements were apparently unaware of or unfamiliar with the operational responsibilities of AF/INE. As a result, taskings and other requirements were sometimes levied directly on AFIS/INO (or sometimes directly on INO divisions), entirely by- passing AF/INE and thus making effective management difficult. This problem was increasingly alleviated (although not eliminated) through better coordination between AF/INE and appropriate AFIS elements, and by the increasing centralization in the AF/INE Executive Support staff of such functions as personnel, training, and budgeting, enabling the AF/INE director to better manage his operations and resources. / The geographic separation of the INO divisions continued to pose special challenges to effective management of the directorate. Only one division, Aerospace Intelligence (AFIS/INOZ), was located at the Pentagon with the director, although this division itself had a satellite operation at Fort Belvoir.* The other divisions were located near Fort Meade, Maryland (Intelligerice Research, AFIS/INOI), and at the Washington Navy Yard (Photo Research, AFIS/INOP), with the Special Activity Applications Group (AFIS/INOH) located at Fort Belvoir. In addition, to the geographic dispersion, these divisions were, in fact, tenants of other organizations (INOI of the National Security Agency (NSA), INOP of the National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC}), and INOH of the Air Force Special Activities Center (AFSAC)), wnich also posed special management con- Siderations. Three personnel issues were also prominent in 1982. One centered on the rotation of personnel assigned to the Editing and Briefing Branch (AFIS/INOZA) and especially to the Alert Facility (AFIS/INOZC). The nature of these jobs (long hours, high pressure and rotating shifts) made reassignment of these personnel ususally desirable after about 18-24 months, well before the end of a normal four year AFIS tour. An internal. reassignment system was established to ensure to the maximum extent possible equitable rotations were made, but this continued to be a chronic problem (and indeed, the factors involved were such that an entirely satisfactory solution would be difficult, if not impossible, to achieve).? A second personnel problem which persisted throughout 1982 was unfilled vacancies, especially in the photo interpreter positions in INOA and INOP. By the end of the year, efforts coordinated among * AFIS/INOX was also located at the Pentagon.
43 the Air Force Director of Estimates (AF/INE}), the ATIS Director of Personnel (AFIS/D°} and the Air Force Manpower and Personnel Center (AFMPC) (Palace Sentinel} appeared to have some promise of resolving this problem during 19S2.+¥ The third problen concerned manning in INOK. Two positions were realigned from AFIS/INOZ3 (one each from AF/INER and AF/INET) to begin operations, but efforts to secure manpower authorizations specifically for INOH were unsuccessful during 1982, requiring continuing use of INOZB positions and the resulting manpower shortage in other divisions. Special Studies The Special Studies Division (AFIS/iNOA) was the ACS/I des- ignated representative for all-source analysis and reporting of foreign camouflage, concealment, and deception (CC&D) worldwide. INOA supported Headquarters USAT, Major Commands (MAJCOMS) and Separate Operating Agencies (SOAs), USAF special planners, intelligence schools, and National Command Authorities with. CC&) intelligence briefings, status reports, and assessments. It also analyzed specific foreign CC&D actions and methods, organizational elements, and doctrine. 12 & AFIS/INOA was a dual-tracked organization --administratively an AFIS element but operationally integrated into the AF/IN Directorate of Estimates (AF/INE) under the Strategic Studies Division (AF/INES). On 31 December, the division was 77 percent manned (18 authorized, 14 assianed). It had two critical Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) 8044 biliets vacant with no fills projected. Especially critical was the major slot at the Washington Navy Yard, vacant since July 1982.13 To meet unit imagery analysis needs, INOA relocated most of its imagery analysts to the National Photographic’ Interpretation Center at the Washinaton Navy Yard (WNY) in February. They were collocated with INO°. The move temporarily relieved overcrowding within the INDA work area in building 520 at Bolling AFB, D.C. However, considering the disadvantages of split operations and planned manpower increase of the collocated Strategic Studies Division (AF/INES) in building 520, AFIS/INOA foresaw a requirement for additional workspace. To this end, INOA submitted a requirement on 20 July for space for the whole operation at the WNY. To support a split operation, INOA requested improved gov- ernment bus service from Bolling to the WNY which was provided. INOA also expressed the need for an official government vehicle to facilitate daily coordination between Bolling AFB and the WNY, and to support rising requirements involving travel in the Washington, D.C. area.
AFIS/INOA also undertook a major effort to support the intelligence requirements of the USAF Air Base Survivability (ABS) effort at Ealin AFB, Florida. The Armaments Division at Eglin requested INOA create a briefing on CC&D measures observed at foreign airfields. The briefing was presented to the organization on 2 August at Eglin and commenced a relationship between AFIS/INOA and the numerous oraanizations working continuity of air base operations during hostilities. INOA provided the air base survivability planners descriptions on how other countries applied CC&D to the ABS problem. 2 CCRD information was disseminated by electrical messaqe, hardcopy in the 'SAFINTEL 509-X series, and by briefings. In 1982, the unit commenced reaular monthly production of the collateral CC&D message status reports and on 3 February released the first fin a reqular) bimonthly series of Special Intelligence supplements to the collateral CC&D status report. USAFINTEL 500-2 was published in June and covered a variety of CC&D topics. The demand for the first hardcopy (USAFINTEL 509-1, December 1981) was greater than anticipated, .o the total printing was increased from 300 to 369. Analysts completed drafting USAFINTEL 500-3, Airfield CC&D, but publication would not take place until 1983. 5 Deleted per 5 U.S.C. 952(b).(1)
46 Also in 1982, INOA made valuable contributions to the CC&D Technical Review Group which consisted of 2 larae cross section of intelligence community representatives and civilian contractors dedicated to understanding and overcoming CC&0.23 a The INOA mission was unique in the U.S. intelligence community. In addition to supporting Headquarters USAF and national level groups, the division expended substantial effort to raise the level of CC&D awareness among various Air Force elements to include MAJCOMS (TAC, SAC, AFCC, AFSC), Research and Development (R&D) organizations, the Foreian Technology Division, and technical schools. Special efforts were made to support Air Force schools since the directorate believed there was a particular need to make Air Force personnel better informed about the pervasive Soviet military and civilian CC&) program. Twice in 1982, Captain John M. Hoopes (Imagery Intelligence Staff Officer) briefed the 3480th Technical Training Wing (TTW) at Goodfellow AF3, Texas. He also prepared a briefing with script for school instructors and periodically updated it. Division personnel also provided curriculum support to the 3420th TTIW, Lowry AFB, Colorado. On several occasions, Major Ken A. Rogers {Political- Deleted per § U.S.C. 552(b) (1>
NN Military Affairs Officer) was a guest lecturer at Air University, Maxwell AFB, Alabama. He briefed the Combined Air Warfare Course, Air Command and Staff College and the Air War College. INOA personnel also provided a quarterly briefing on Soviet deception at the Air Force Tactical Deception School in San Antonio, Texas and collaborated with the Directorate of Soviet Awareness (AFIS/INC) to enhance the CC&D content in their well regarded course, 30 INOA support to tactical units was disappointing. Unit personnel had extensive information on enemy deception tactics at the tactical level of extreme importance to pilots, weapons controllers, and wing commanders. Plans to brief tactical units in USAFE and PACAF during the year were unfulfilled. To partially solve this problem, the division developed, with the enthusiastic assistance of Master Sergeant Dave Duggins of the Pentagon Air Force Studio, a CC&D video presentation. Production was expected to be completed in 1983.31 ay ee ie 3 ~ Pos r, a3. - & ee } . tom Yaa ye fh. a a? . sy Ue tae fe co re : . - eS Pete ye) a. oe Deleted per 5 U.S.C. 952(b) (1) : g ;- rE b.. en Us Nett rita
7 Tye Sghene iad # gehpen. bs a Sewrte ese +s + So INOA also investigated two other data base possibilities which oved unfeasible. Imagery analysts at the WNY attempted to establish a system on the Lexitron VT 1303 Word Processor, but, it proved inflexible. The alternate method for a total data base was to use the CIA computer and augment the existing software and data base written by MATHTECH of Princeton, New Jersey. Unable to obtain ready access to the CIA controlled terminals, INOA ceased pursuing this option. Overall, the division achieved little visible progress in achieving its data automation requirements. However, it was able to more precisely articulate its needs. Colonel Mabile believed that prospects for 1983 would be considerably brighter. 3/ Special Activities Applications Grou In early January 1982, Colonel Cortlandt M. Taylor, Director of Estimates (AF/INE), requested a Study to determine the feasibility of establishing an INE element (Special Activity Applications Group, AFIS/INOH) at the Air Force Special Activities Center (AFSAC) (located at Fort Belvoir) in an effort to better integrate human resources inteliigence (HUMINT) into the Air Staff estimative and current intelligence process. He requested a review of current working relationships between INE and AFSAC, and recommendations on how these relationships could be improved through the establishment of a Special Activities Applications Group (AFIS/INOK). Due to his extensive HUMINT background, Major Ray Kilikauskas, then assigned to the Director of Estimates, Weapons Space and Technology Division (AF/INET), was asked to perform the study. To carry out the assigned task, 42 INE analysts were interviewed regarding their perceptions of HUMINT and their working relatianships with AFSAC. Numerous AFSAC personnel were also interviewed in an effort to assess their views and analyze current procedures for supporting the Air Staff. The Findings were summarized in an informal Staff Study and a briefing presented to Colone? Taylor in late January.3 552(b) (i Deleted per 5 U.S.C. Deleted per 5 U.S.C. 552(b) (1) lf}
50 AFIS/INOH was tasked with the following mission: establish and maintain an Air Staff analyst-HUMINT Community interface; research HUMINT reporting for Air Staff intelligence analysts and prepare studies and analysis based on HUMINT as input to AF/IN assessments; act as focal point for researching, writing and validating Air Staff HUMINT collection reauirements; establish and maintain the Air Force HUMINT Orientation Program for AF/IN and AFIS; prepare and coordinate HUMINT briefing items for AF/IN; arrange for analysts to participate in HUMINT debriefings; and coordinate analysts participation in HUMINT collection planning and operations. 45 During 1952, INOH reported to the Director of Estimates (AF/INE) through the AFIS Director of Ooerational Intelligence (AFIS/INO). Due -tO its initial small size, INOH was titled the Special Activities Application Group. Although having no formal reporting relationship, iNOH had a coordination responsibility with trie AFSAC Commander (Colonel Nicx Yankowski) and his staff,49 By the end of the year a General Defense Intelligence Program (GDIP) initiative had been submitted requestina two billets in FY86 and two in FY87.99 at Meanwhile, on 8 July, Colonel Taylor requested the Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence (ACS/I) give permanent status to INOH. General Marks concurred in this action. On 27 October, Technical Sergeant Marty Leitner was assianed to INOH for a Sixty day trial period. Sergeant Leitner was a skilled DIAOLS-COINS operator. Due to his presence during November, INOH was able to aet the research portion of its mission on a firmer footing. On 7 December, Cojonel Taylor approved Sergeant Leitner‘s permanent assicnment to INOH. ° During 1932, INOH, working with AFSAC, built an Air force HUMINT Orientation Program. The progran was a one day presentation Deleted per 5 U.S.C. 552(b) (1) i
that described the functions of AFSAC and its detachments and detailed the functionina of the HUMINT requirements, tasking, and operations systems. INOK presented a thirty minute block on relationship to AF/IN, AFIS and AFSAC analysts. Four presentations of the program took place (5 May, 18 May, 10 June and 26 Auqust). Seventy AF/IN and AFIS analysts attended. Comments on the critique eets attested to the x le ( . —_ , _ on 4 t was important to note that after each orientation, the INOH workload increased as analysts started tasking the system through the services provided by INOH.°2 INOH also serviced 30 requests for requirements research. This involved researching HUMINT requirements and providing analysts with a copy of the requirements in his area of expertise. AS a result, by the end of the year, AF/IN and AFIS analysts updated or added to five standing requirements by some other oraanization its charter and . Deleted per 5 U.S.G. 552(b) (LP
' vhte . (1) (a)zss *9°S°AS tad pales > 2 3] fh. ce] 8) 4] w a gy 18] 4 gw — _ -~ | @ + G
re) AFIS/INOI, coliocated with the NSA at its Friendship Annex (FANX) located near the Baltimore-Washington International Airport, was organizationally subordinate to the Director of perational Intetligence (AFIS/INO) with functional and operational control exercised by the Director of Estimates (AF/INE). On 15 June, the division was formally reorganized from two branches (Strategic Systems and Aircraft/Defensive Missiles) to three branches (Missile and Space, Aircraft and C3 and Intelligence). Also, a Deputy Division Chief position was established at the General Manager (GM-14) level. In addition, the division was directed to initiate manpower acquisition for a fourth branch which would address Third World activities. The Air Force Directorate of Manpower and Organization (AF/MPME) validated INOI's request for six analysts. Acquisition of these analysts was expected in Fyg5.61 As of 31 December, the division was authorized 28 military and civlian personnel with 24 assigned. Procurement actions were underway for four additional people (three civilian and one military). During the year, two attempts were made to have existing facilities renabdilitated and or relocate the office within the main NSA complex; however, neither initiative was successful. An additional request for rehabilitation was submitted to NSA in December.62 aS Throughout 1982, INOI began purchasing the majority of its leased equipment. By the end of the year, the division owned a DACOM 412G and two VT 1303 Lexitron Text Processors (consisting of two CRTs . With keyboards and dual disk drives and two VT1000 printers). INOI terminated rental of an IBM Mag Card II typewriter and also turned in for salvage an old Recordak Micracode microfilmer which was neither serviceable nor repairable. The division also upgraded from a Xerox 4000 copier to a Royal 130R copier with greater capabilities for less money. These actions resulted in an enhanced equipment posture at less continuing cost.6 Photo Research The Imagery Research Division (AFIS/INOP) provided imagery research and analysis to Air Staff intelligence analysts for use in Deleted per 5 U.S.C. 552(b) (1) ) Deleted per 5 u.S.C. 552(b) (
54 preparing Air Force intelligence estimates, briefings, interagency intelligence memorandums, force level determinations, and special analyses; provided quick reaction imagery research and analysis under crises conditions, during fast breaking events requiring continuing Air Force interest and analysis, and for immediate developments requiring Air Force Intelligence (AF/IN) developed positions for interagency working groups; provided imagery research and analysis to Air Force Commands and organizations having no organic imagery analysis capabilities; participated in development and evaluation of advanced sensor, exploitation, and or dissemination systems as they impacted on the AF/IN and AFIS missions; and served as the Director of Estimates (AF/INE) focal point within the National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC) for all imagery related actions involving AF/INE and NPIC analysts.69 me his small unit of eight personnel (two officers, six enlisted focused its operational capabilities solely upon imagery research and analysis. INOP had no organic photo processing fiim library, film storage, or computer capabilities, obtaining support in these area: from NPIC under a host tenant agreement. The division was functionally organized with each analyst having subject area responsibilities corresponding to given AF/INE analytical functions. Special project assignments corresponded to each analysts' particular expertise. Being collocated within the NPIC facility afforded ING: personnel an outstanding opportunity for continuous dialogue with national level imagery analysts and critical timely access to national! imagery files and data bases.66 In February, the first contingent of personnel from the Special Studies Division (AFIS/INOA) arrived at INOP. Colonel Cortlandt Taylor, Director of Estimates, agreed in late 1981 to a collocation of all AF/IN and AFIS imagery analysis functions within the NPIC facility. INOA remained collocated with INOP throughout the year. The addition of five imagery analysts to INOP’s smail area (1140 square feet) forced a great deal of “creative” furniture arrangements. However, NPIC renovation plans in 1982 cailed for INOP and INOA to occupy a new 1600 square foot room in early 1983,68 Deleted per 5 U.S.C. 552(b) (1)
Throughout the veer, INOP personnel briefed numercus visitors on the units’ organization and mission, represented the Air Force on various interagency working groups, attended several TDY conferences anc training programs, and provided support to numerous projects (see Appendix X}. On 1 April, the unit upgraded to division status with no increase in manpower. Also on that date, Captain Ashby D. Elmore replaced Lieutenant Colonel James R. Carruth as Chief of the organization. Colonel Carruth transferred to Air Force Checkmate. 6? Aerospace Intelligence The Aerospace Intelligence Division (AFIS/INOZ) provided current intelligence briefing support to the Chief of Staff, Air Force (CSAF), maintained a 24-hour Alert Branch on behalf of the Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence (ACS/I), and the Commander, AFIS, and provided graphics support to the ACS/I, Air Staff and AFIS. Additionally, editors and briefers provided current intelligence briefings and updates to senior Air Staff members. Direct support was rendered to Air_Force analysts for both current intelligence and long- term estimates. The Visual Display Branch (AFIS/INOZD) functional statement was revised on 12 August. The branch was responsible for providing a vehicle for Air Force intelliqence participation in the creation, modification and maintenance of national and international products for the purpose of informing decision-makers on intelligence matters; providing services fo. intelligence-related programs to other federal agencies as requested; and also served as the agency representative in interdepartmental audio-visual matters. 7 INOZ personnel manning remained constant throughout the year. Personnel authorizations included 24 military and seven civilians. INOZD eliminated over 600 feet of building space in building T-1921 at Fort Belvoir. This space was donated to the AFIS Administrative Division (AFIS/DA) for expansion of operations. INOZD completely renovated the facility with new carpet, panel walls, drop ceiling and added two windows. However, lack of space continued to be the main problem in the central facility at the Pentagon. /3 Deleted per 5 U.S.C. >52(b)44)- ype
56 During 1982, INOZA presented over 900 briefings to various Air f agencies and functions. Two major steff groups were added to the regular briefing schedule -- the Deputy Chief of Staff, Manpower and Personnel (AF/MP) and the Air Force Directorate of Programs and Evaluation (AF/PRP). The Deputy Chief of Staff, Plans and Operations (DCS/920) canceiled their requirement for intelligence briefings during their morning staff meetings as a result of time constraints and reorganizations. INOZA added twelve consumers to the daily ACS/I1 intelligence briefing message. Total worldwide distribution for this message was now 66. Three consumers were added to distribution for the preliminary briefing script bringing that total to 42 various consumers in the Washington, D.C. area. INOZC received and processed approximately 250,000 copies of compartmented and collateral message traffic in support of the ACS/I. The branch also authored approximately 400 briefing items for the daily current intelligence briefing presented to the CSAF and other Air Staff agencies. This was nearly a doubling of briefing preparation over the previous year, due largely to new, increased emphasis on close INOZC participation in current intelligence production. INOZC became solely responsible for the preparation of items for the “weekend update" Monday CSAF current intelligence briefing. Additicnally, over 400 stand-up situation briefings were. provided by INOZC officers and noncommissioned officers (NCOs) to senior Air Staff personnel. The watch officer and NCO shift schedules were changed from twelve-hour shifts to eight-hour shifts paralleling the National Military Intelligence Center (NMIC) shift schedules. AS a result, morale improved and daily operational interface with NMIC analysts improved. The format for the INOZC Alert Officer Log was changed to present amore professional product. Also, an INOZC Executive Summary (IES) was developed and implemented to report concise significant events for senior Air Force’ Inteiligence functions. Branch Operational Instructions (OIs) were updated and new OIs created to streamline and standardize Alert Center operations. Attendance by INOZC personnel at the DIS I[&W course continued and was deemed extremely beneficial. INOZD supported AF/IN, AFIS and AFSAC through the production of 8,404 graphic aids -- mostly vugraph transparencies. A total of 3,500 visual aids were produced in direct support of the CSAF daily intelligence briefing. In addition, 4,904 visual aids were produced for other elements within the organization. Photographic service was also a major part of INOZD requirements. INOZD produced 5,542 35mm Slides, 820 prints and 302 pieces of art work for publications. The branch also provided direct support in producing visual aids to many key briefings such as the Transition Team, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, CIA, general officers and senior officials.’ TARGET INTELLIGENCE Effective 27 September, the Target Intelligence Division (AFIS/INOT) was designated as a full directorate (AFIS/INT) by AF/IN. This action was the culmination of a lengthy program designed to
37 establish AFIS/IkT as tne focal point for targeting as well as mapping, charting, and qeodesy (MC&G) within the Air Force./ => The reoraanization started in mid-1981 when INT presented to Major neral John 8. Marks (Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence) the AF/IN-AFIS targetina posture, its resources and workload. Highlighted, at that time, was the fact the targeting function supporting the Air Staff was totally reactive in nature and lacked direction. INT recommended targeting be refocused to work targeting poticy issues and provide more support to the operational commands. Following Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence (ACS/I) quidance, INT, in late 1981 and eariy 1982, began to move in this direction. Manpower needs for the reoraanization were identified and INT began defining its Air Staff role. By mid-1982 action had been completed to fill four new personnel billets, increase targeting involvement in the Joint and Air Force review process, and improve lines of communication with the Air Staff, Major Commands (MAJCOMs), Department of Defense (00D) agencies and Unified and Specified commands. All actions stressed policy involvement and increased operations-intelligence interface. 79 ° Concepts and Applications Reorientation of the Concepts and Applications Division (AFI TA) resuited in the establishment of two theater specialist positions, one officer and one noncommissioned officer position to oversee Air Force targeting resources, an additional weaponeer, a systems application officer position and the hosting of the first wor Idwide USAF Target Intelligence Conference. Several new lona-term objectives were identified for the newly elevated division. With a full complement of manpower expected to be in place by the end of the second quarter of Fiscal Year (FY) 1983, INTA was scheduled to include even more objectives deaiing with policy determination, direction, and operations- intel ligengs interface rather than just target intelligence production activities. To firmly establish INTA as the focal point throughout the Air Force for targeting matters, INTA began writing a 200 series Air Force regulation for targeting. Tnais regulation would delineate target functions and responsibilities and would formalize other Air Force target and related MC&G publications. Additionally, INTA planned to expand their contact through more frequent visits to all operational commands and agencies. Additional objectives inciuded initiating greater interreaction and collaboration with the Air Force Directorate of Intelligence Plans and Systems (AF/INY), Research and Development (R&D) organizations, and plans and operations communities in systems
58 development; within intelligence, work to assure collection, exploitation and dissemination systems support targeting concepts, especially in the area of adaptive plannina, rapid retaraeting, electronic combat and unconventional warfare; and with R&D, plans, and operational communities, work closely to help develop improved concepts of operations and applications for new and established systems which required a targeting and MC&G perspective. This would include assuring availability of test data for the Joint Munitions Effectiveness Manual community, and evaluation of new analytical techniques such as Tactical Air Target Recommender and the Target Prioritization System. Additionally, INTA expected to increase emphasis on standardization of targeting equipment Air Force wide. 33 a INTA also planned to stay attuned to the fact modern, useable data bases were vital to the targeting and operations community. Toward this end, INTA began working to enhance and improve target and related MC&G data bases such as the Future Strategic Targets List and the Automated Installation Intelligence File to support weapons acquisition planning and warfighting capabilities. This would mean an increased involvement in identifying collection requirements. By ensuring greater or better use of Human Intelligence (HUMINT) resources, INTA could assure better identification of target elements for pinpoint targeting. This would be particularly important to unconventional warfare forces and to systems requiring detailed and accurate target planning. Other initiatives included more participation in auditing and evaluating command and joint exercises, thereby fostering improvements in the targeting process and taraets operations. As functional manager of Air Force Specialty Codes (AFSCs) 808X and 201X1, INTA would continue to initiate actions to enhance and improve management of the career fields. These actions were scheduled to include: (1) a base line review of target billets in order to identify possible changes which would result in more efficient use of the resources; (2) closer collaboration and cooperation with Manpower and Personnel Center (MPC) on assianment actions affecting targeting resources; and (3) individual, personal contact with all Air Force targeting personnel in order to foster enhanced management of this scarce resource. These initiatives, coupled with INTA's current activities had set them on the road toward accomplishing their goal. Their improving manpower position would enable them to branch out into areas where their expertise had been lacking and was required. While the intent to become the focal point could require some time to reach fruition, Colonel John S. McKenney (Director of Targets) believed that personal, frequent contact with all associ ated agencies, organizations, and individuals would help INTA achieve its goal. Atso during 1982, tne Targets Directorate hosted the first annual worldwide Air force Target Intelliaence Conference. General Marks was extremely pleased with the results. He stated: "The first Air Force Target Intelliaence Conference was a pioneering event, and | want to commend the participants for their efforts in making it a
v7 success. To mv knowledge, only one other intelliaence specialty has attempted to gather its representatives from all levels of assignment and major commands to discuss the functional issues related to their discipline." In all, the conference was a success and pointed out the need for an annual meeting of representatives from the targeting community. Mapping, Charting, and Geodes;’ Durine 1982, the Mapping. Charting, and Geodesy Division (AFI TB) participated in the Dr. Hermann Study Group chartered by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (05D) to study and make recommendations to improve the mapping, charting, and geodesy (MC&G) requirements process. 58 As functional manager for the Cartographic Geodetic Officer (AFSC 57XX} and Geodetic Surveyor (AFSC 222X0) career fields, INTB took several actions to solve long-standing problems which had reduced the effectiveness of MC&G proarams. The problems stemmed from a reduction in numbers and qualifications of personne] at a time when technology of cartography and aeodesy and its application to automated weapons systems were increasing greatly. The result was = an insufficient number of MC&G officers to adequately represent Air Force interests within the Defense Mapping Agency (DMA), provide technical expertise within M4JCOM staffs, and ensure consideration of MC&G requirements and limitations during weapon system development. The career field orew out of balance with a void in the middle grades and an overall manpower structure which did not provide positions for junior officers to gain training and experience. The educational prerequisites and the training provided did not keep pace _with advancing technology. Two-thirds of the positions were in DMA with consequent personnel problems due to joint agency manning policies and the need for officers to spend several tours assigned outside the Air Force proper. The potential of the new technology and the dependency of modern weapons systems on it had not become adequately appreciated throughout the Air Force as a whole. 99 During the year, INTB initiated several actions to correct these problems. Approval of an INTB request for an occupational measurement survey of all 57XXs and 222X0s was granted by AFMPC/MPCRPQ on 17 January. A project meeting held at the Occupational Measurement Center (OMC) on 23 June set milestones, identified task subjects, and recommended interview locations. . By the end of the year, the OMC project officer had completed a draft task list and distributed it for review by senior career field members. On 16 March, INTB requested that Cartographic Geodetic officers be authorized to participate in the Air Force Institute of Technology's (AFIT's)  Scientific/Engineer Continuing Education Program. Headquarters Air Training Command, Educational Division (ATC/ED), granted approval on 11 May. By using this program, officers would be better able to keep technically current, and the technical nature of the career field would be better appreciated.9
60 ® INTB proposed a Functional Management Inspection (FMI) on MC&G Support Within Major Commands and Research, Development, Test and Evaiuation (RDT&E) Oraanizations on 11 August. The Air Force Inspection and Safety Center, Inspector General (AFISC/1G), accepted the proposal on 26 August and made it their first priority FMI for the AFISC Intelligence Branch. Due to other tasking and the loss of personnel, it was scheduled for the summer and fall of 1983.93 In order to ensure new accessions into the 57XX career field met e€ prerequisites for AFIT advanced degree programs and were equipped tc take advantage of Defense Mapping School technical training, INTB proposed a change to AFR 36-1 on 26 October. The primary change for both AFSCs 5716 and 5734 was a mandatory requirement for 30 semester hours of physical sciences, including differential and integral calculus. Continued discussions with senior officers of the DMA helped induce them to take their own initiazives to improve the personnel situation. On 18 August, they briefed the ACS/I and INTB on their proposed actions. 94 INTELLIGENCE DATA MANAGEMENT = The Intelligence Data Management Directorate (AFIS/IND)* planned, coordinated and managed all USAF automated intelligence systems; performed Automated Data Processing (ADP) Single Manager duties (specified in AFR 300-12); led the Air Force intelligence community by managing development and maintenance of intelligence standard software; provided Air Force representation in the Department of Defense Intelligence Information System (DODIIS) community activities; maintained the Intelligence Data Handting System (IDHS) financial program; and supported Air Force intelligence activity missions with direct ADP, special data handling and staff support. Throughout 1982, AFIS/IND retained two major subdivisions -- the Operations and Development Division (AFIS/INDO) and the Resources and Management Division (AFIS/INDR}. In July, Colonel George W. King replaced Colonel William R. Gray as the director of IND. Colonel King wes previously Deputy Assistant for Command Data Automation at Headquarters USAFE, Ramstein Air Base, Germany. Colonel Gray became Division Chief for the Planning Division, Air Force Intelligence Plans and Systems Directorate (AF/INYX) at the Pentagon. ed During the year, the Program Flement Monitor (PEM) function for Communications P£s 31339 and 31398 was transferred to IND and assumed by Major Steve Mohan. “Resources ($21 million) were more effectively programmed to support ADP communications. Renovation of building 520 at Bolling AFB, 0.C. was approved and contracted for in preparation for the move of AFIS/INDO from building 5631 (also located * Although assigned to AFIS, IND directly supported the Air Force Directorate of Intelliaence Plans and Systems /AF/INY)
61 at Bollina AfB). The oriaine? renovation completion date was projected as December 1982 but was delayed until Calendar Year (CY) 1983. Work continued on the construction of the AFIS Computer Facility in buildine P-20 with an estimated completion date in 1983. => The Modular Architecture for Exchange of Intelligence (MAXI) was declared the DODIIS Standard Sinale Processor Automated Message Handling System (AMHS) in March. MAXI continued to grow in both capabilities and in numbers of sites. In addition to its previous capabilities, the MAXI system could now operate: (1) in a multi- processor configuration; (2) with an Intelligence Data Handling System Communication I] (IDHSC-I1) access; (3) as a Front-End Processor (FEP) for Computer Aided Tactical Information System (CATIS); and (4) with an expanded number and expanded types of terminals. By the end of the year, eight MAXI sites were operational. New sites included the 497th Reconnaissance Group (RTG) (Headquarters USAFE); the 480th RTG (Headquarters TAC); the Tactical Air Warfare Center (TAWC); Headquarters Electronic Security Command (ESC) and Headquarters Readiness Command (REDCOM). MAXI, designated as a DODIIS standard software system, had aenerated arowing interest © throughout the intelligence as well as the command and control community. AFIS/IND planned future MAXI installations at command and control sites as well as additional intelligence sites. 98 In January, new Common User Baseline for the Intelligence Community (CUBIC) Configuration Management procedures went into effect for AFIS contractors and the entire CUBIC user community. These procedures allowed areater AFIS/IND involvement and control over software probiem reporting and solution. IND generated monthly status reports and sent ther by message to all CUBIC users and contractors. The Configuration Management Plan for AFIS was also rewritten. CUBIC users commented that the detailed tracking by AFIS produced timely solutions to their software problems. In September, Captain Tony Burch arrived at AFIS/IND to take over Configuration Management (CM) and by October headed a three-man CM shop. IND CM capabilities were scheduled to increase with the advent of the AFIS Computer Facility at Bolling AFE. Testina of all future CUBIC software releases and software fixes was planned.-- AF/IN, AFIS and the Air Force Special Activities Center (AFSAC) Intelligence Data Handling (IOHS) users in_ the National Capitol Area (NCA) received improved and expanded IDHS capability through the AF/IN-AFIS-AFSAC IDHS Support Contract. In November, INCO, Incorporated of McLean, Virginia, was awarded the basic one year contract with two options. The contract included IDH Systems modification and development and systems architecture planning required in the IDHS Five-Year Plan. Work transition, as a result of the change in contractors, was not smooth. In some cases, software developed under the previous contract had to be researched before being tested and implemented by the new contractor. 190 The IDHS Steering Group, chaired by General Bissell, met three times in that period. Steering Group members, the Air Staff
62 division chiefs, AFIS directors and the AFSAC Commander, discussed and prioritized software modification and development requests. During the first Steering Group meeting, the proposed AF/IN-AFIS AMHS received unanimous support and was therefore included in the General Defense Intelligence Program (GDIP) for FY 85 funding. 101 el ene rae Seren » TREES et E t a Ope ART mag ewe: a oS LN wien’ Sy at ae eee rs ee ah, aN XS poy SS Ee nt SBE BR FSS . OS Teepe os i Peleted per 5 U.S.C. 552(b) (1)
63 SECUP ITY AND COMMUNICATIONS MANAGEMENT The Directorate of Security and Communications Management (AFIS/INS) (located at the Pentagon) managed and evaluated al) collateral security support functions; controlled and disseminated Top Secret and special categories of classified information; and monitored visit requests and release of collateral information to civilian contractors. It also managed the worldwide Air Force Special Security Office (AFSSO) system by ensuring compliance with Compartmented Intelligence Security Policy, Special Intelligence Telecommunications Policy, Communications Security Policy and Procedures, Physical Security, Billet Management, and Personnel Clearance Programs at al} organizational levels. 106 AFIS/INS retained four subordinate divisions during 1982. These included the Collateral Security and Administrative Support Division ‘AFIS/INSA); the Personnel Security Division (Billets Branch and Adjudication Branch} (AFIS/INSB); the Management Division (Facilities Branch) (AFIS/INC); and the Air Force Special Security Office (Product Dissemination Branch) (AFIS/INSD). Colonel George J. Mercuro continued as the overall Director. 107 Collateral Security Throughout 1982, the Collateral Security Division (AFIS/INSA) was the primary office of responsibility for the collateral security program within AF/IN and AFIS. As such, it provided security guidance to newcomers, conducted security meetings, security inspections, conducted investigations on security incidents, - and monitored downarading and declassification actions. As part of the downarading and declassification program, INSA monitored the review of over 50,002 paaes cf material dating from 1955 forward, at the National Archives Records Service (NARS), Washington, D.C. This review was in relation to a Freedom of Information action. The end result of the review was that 500 of the pages required continued classification. AFIS/INSA was also responsible for the establishment of Air Force policy on the release of classified intelligence to U.S. contractors and monitored one time requests for release action. Over 300 one-time requests were processed during 1982 with approximately 11,000 documents sent to U.S. contractors on a routine basis.108 Effective 1 April, INSA assumed the collateral suoport functions previously performed by the AFIS Administration Division (AFIS/DAU). The functions transferred included Freedom of Information actions by AF/IN, Pentagon building passes, parking control, customer account control for Pentagon and Bolling AFB activities, space control, telephone and interoffice communications control, transportation control, and Air Staff mail and message distribution systems. Three pcsitions were transferred along with the functions. 109 INSS assumed 2 portion of the functions previously performed by the Intelligence Reference Branch (AFIS/INDOC) on 16 July. One
64 position was transferred along with the functions, The incumbent served as: (1) the representative to the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) in establishing accounts and requirements for collateral intelligence publications for AF/IN, AFIS, Air Staff, MAJCOMS, and SOAs worldwide; (2) monitored certain Air Force publication requirements in the 200 series and miscellaneous intelligence documents to customers that had not established an account with DIA; and (3) retained responsibility for rider actions -- an action where DIA had determined that they would disseminate to DIA offices only. If a military agency wanted to send the document within their organization, a ride-on to DIAs requirements was submitted to the Government Printing Office through the appropriate funding office. Each military, | agency was responsible for the cost of the publication in question. aed In late November, the biographic files and validation for intelligence publications functions were transferred from AFIS/INDOC to INSA. One position was transferred with the functions. This person performed these functions and also served as back-up to the functions transferred from INDOC in April. AFIS/INSA also served as the Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR) for contractor visits, security reviews from the Secretary of the Air Force, Public Affairs Office of Security Review (SAF/PAS), monitored the Headquarters Top Secret control system, and continued as the control pcint for International Pact Organization (1P6) documents and other special category documents. Personnel Securit The Personnel Security Division ({AFIS/INSB) managed the worldwide Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) program for Air Force military, civilian, consultant, and contractor personnel; adjudicated reports of investigation on personnel who required access to SCI; managed the Air Force SCI billet structure and access rosters -- with an annual workload of 20,900 personnel security cases adjudicated, over 30,000 cases microfilmed, over 50,900 file searches conducted and personnel indoctrinated and debriefed, and over 8,000 billet requests processed; and insured that the most sensitive national intelligence information was fully protected and distributed on a strict need-to-know basis. 113 The Intelligence Community continued discussions regarding the use of the polygraph for SCI indoctrinated individuals. On 6 August, the Deputy Secretary of Defense directed that the military departments implement a procram of polygraph screening for persons with SCI access. The polygraph examination would address counter- intelligence questions only. Under the new direction, AFIS/INS8 would determine which Air Force personnel would be polyaraphed and the Air Force Office of Special Investiaation (AFOS!) would conduct the actual polygraph examinations, 114
65 In September, the Chief of INSB met with National Security Agency (NSA) and OSI] representatives on the polygraphing of Air Force military personnel assignec tc the NSA. It was agreed that NSA would polygraph all Air Force personnel currently assigned to NSA but that AFOS] would assume this responsibility at a later date (undetermined as of 31 December) with polygraph arrangements being made through AFIS/INSB. INSB and the Air Force Manpower and Personnel Center (AFMPC) were scheduled to work together to establish procedures for notifying an individual of the NSA polygraph requirement, 115 @ Due to concern over the personnel security investigation shortfalls (i.e. investigative backlogs, unacceptable completion time, etc.) new Special Background and Periodic Requests (SBI-PR) Investigation procedures were established. The Deputy Secretary of Defense directed that individuals indoctrinated for SCI execute an updated statement of personnel history on the five year anniversary date of the completion of the most recent SBI. This version would be reviewed by the supervisor to determine if any relevant information had been excluded. Expanded investiqations would be conducted only as mecesSary (i.e. only in cases in which derogatory information was found). This policy was changed in early 1982. Later, however, it was decided that the Defense Investigative Service (DIS) would resume investigations for all SBI-PRs by 1 April 1983.116 ) Despite a substantial increase in SCI biilet requests, the division reduced the processing time to a minimum. INSB also developed an updated progran for billet/access management (SABRE). Eventually, subordinate commands would be able to submit billet and access changes and updates electronically through the AUTODIN system as required.il? During 1982, all civilian adjudicators, with the exception of one person, attended the SCI Adjudicators course sponsored by the CIA. Both adjudication teams held meetings (at least once each week ) to discuss problem areas and questions on matters of policy that were in the process of being chanaed or that had been changed. At that time, Adjudicators were advised of any changes affecting SCI adjudication. This helped ensure standardization of the adjudication process. 118 _ AFIS/INSB received approximately 35,000 Nondisciosure Agreements from individuals authorized SCI access. The information was entered into a computer; however, the data was not stored within a DIA storage area or GSA storage facility. The division had asked for authorization to do so, but no approval had been received by the end of the year. INSB also developed a viable Due Process program for ensuring that each person denied SCI access was furnished reasons for the denial and was afforded the opportunity to appeal that decision. ww Throughout the year, INSB microfilmed all hard copy records and incorporated them into the master data base. The division also input all pertinent information of approximately one-fourth of these
66 records into the SA32f system. This increased the data base by two- fold, inus climinating twenty filing cabinets, and providing an addit‘onal nine feet of working area. These actions improved working conditions and reduced research time by one-quarter. 120 Security Management The Management Division (AFIS/INSC) continued to perform its primary function of supporting USAF intelligence activities and Air Force Special Security Offices (AFSSOs) under the security cognizance of the Air Force Assistant Chief of Staff, Inteiliaence (ACS/I). AFIS/INSC conducted an SCI Security Management Course for Air Force military and civilian personnel assianed, or to be assigned, to worldwide SCI security positions. The course frequency was established as bimonthly. An arrangement had been made with. Palace Sentinel personnel to routinely schedule ali newly. assigned AFSSO/SSO personnel for training enroute PCS. A total of six classes were held in 1982 with 87 personnel provided SCI security management training. This represented an increase of 18 over the 69 trained in 1981.122 A total of 230 Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities (SCIFs) and 46 contractor special security offices were accredited under the Air Force SCI security management program. This included 33 AFSSOs, of which one was added in 1982 -- AFSSO SE ROCC, Tyndall AFB, Florida. Twenty-six new SCIFs were accredited, eight SCIFs were transferred from another agency, and four SCIF accredidations were withdrawn. One AFSSO (AFSSO 24th Air Division, Malmstrom AFB, Montana) and one Consolidated Telecommunications Center (CTCC) (also at Malmstrom AFB) were inactivated during the year. There were a total of 246 communications actions and nine Emergency Reaction Air Force Special Security Office and Readiness Command (REDCOM) personnel support actions ‘fin support of four exercises) processed durina the year. In addition, two OSSCS/GENSER consolidated telecommunications centers were created (Eglin AFB, Florida and Maxwell AFB, Alabama).124 The upgrade to the AF/IN National Security Agency (NSA) Gray secure phone switch was completed in May and all telephone switch equipment was relocated from room BD-951 to BD-926. This freed space for rehabilitation and subsequent use by the Facilities Branch. The system now had the capability to. accommodate additional lines, given sufficient crypto equipment, and functions with an improved electronic switch rather than the older, mechanical switch, 125 Two special studies were supported durina the year. The Facilities Branch continued to provide information, on an informal basis, to the Government Accounting Office (GAO) (Mr. Irving Bocker and Mr. Jim Reid) on the Air force compartmented industrial facilities protection program. This was in support of GAO Project #09709, OSD case #6142. The draft GAQ report yas released in December; INS responded with comments on 16 December. 12
67 The Facilities 8ranch also provided information and support to the House Appropriations Committee Surveys and Investigations Team inquiry into the activities of the Defense Investiqative Service and SCI carve-out contracts. Assistance provided included systems descriptions, coordination of selection and visit to a_ typical multiuser contractor, and the provision of data relative to the amount of money spent on SCI gggtracts and the number of people cleared to support these contracts. 2? Ld Throughout the year, the Management Division continued to extend and improve the quality of USAF Intelligence (USAFINTEL) specialized intelligence publications. Issued in accordance with AFR 8-31, these publications were used extensively to communicate aerospace intelligence and intelliqence policies and procedures which, because of their sens.tive content, could not be included in standard Air Force publications. The division was also responsible for nine USAFINTEL 201-X series publications which were distributed through the Air Force Special Security Office (AFSSO) system (AFR 200-72). Normal distribution included all authorized Air Force SCI elements, USAF Unified and Specified Command SCI Facilities (SCIFs), and other selected Intelligence SCI activities. The division was also responsible for the administrative revi ew of any USAFINTEL publication produced by other AF/IN or AFIS elements.+28 Some of the more significant changes involved USAFINTEL Regulations 201-1, 201-2, 201-5 and 201-6. A change was issued to USAFINTEL 201-1 (The Security, Use and Dissemination of Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) which added a new Government Controlled-Contractor Operated (GOCO) facility; updated policy on marking SCI documents; told how to account for SCI working materia} and changed Automated Data Processing (ADP) card column format for 9D Form 1912 and 1913; completely updated policy on SCI billets and related matters; provided implementing instructions on the new SCI Nondisclosure Aareement (NDA) and reiated forms, and added policy on the release of personnel security information; reauired that destruction priorities be clearly indicated; added several terms to the Glossary; updated examples of standard forms for personnel security reports and queries; and made other changes throughout the directive, 129 A revision was issued to USAFINTEL 201-1 (Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) Management Guide) to update the guidance designed to assist SCI security officials in performing inspections and related visits required by USAFINTEL 201-1, Chapter 17. It was also used for local self-evaluations, as a training aid, or in planning and conducting staff assistance visits te SCIFs. It was not a substitute for basic SCI control system directives. A revision to USAFINTEL 291-5 (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility Directory) updated the manning and listing of SCIFs Air Force wide. Two changes to USAFINTEL 291-6 (Special
Intelligence (SI) Classification Guide) addressed guidance on classification of USAF reconnaissance aircraft; updated items on Foreian Instrumentation Sianals; corrected quidance on SCE activations and inactivations; added quidance on the classification of the SC] billet structure and related rosters; and made other minor changes in the guide. Other support to the intelligence community included money for urchase of ten video player/monitors to be used in support of SCI indoctrination and education. A total of 67 worldwide Air Force SCI security incidents or violations were reported to INSC for processing during 1982.132 Special Security ~ wd — o~ BB Naot N wy wi . ro] ° ve] ’ 2 Fa) he BY a ba © Q ed a rt w i=)
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF INSD OPERATIONS i “he e ame -. a. ww ~-« a. boll NN w wv r ce) ° w . += a] i a a so 9 ed Qo FY
CHAPTER ITi INTELLIGENCE PROGRAMS | 4 In addition to direct intelligence support, the Air Force Intelligence Service (AFIS) continued to conduct several key intelligence programs. These included the Intelligence Reserve Forces (AFIS/RE); Attache Affairs (AFIS/INH); Evasion, Escape, and Prisoner of War (POW) (AFIS/INR); Soviet Affairs (AFIS/INC); and the Air Force Special Activities Center (AFSAC).1 - INTELLIGENCE RESERVE FORCES MISSION AND RESOURCES Mission The Intelligence Reserve Forces Division (AFIS/RE) directed the Air Force Intelligence Reserve (AFIR) Program and developed a combat ready reserve force to support active force intelligence operations during peacetime contingencies or wartime mobilization. The division also managed the Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) positions which had been established by the Major Commands (MAJCOMs) and agencies, validated by the Air Staff at. the Pentagon (AF/MPM) and transferred to AFIS for centralized control. As Director of the Intelligence Reserve Forces, Colonel John R. Oberst desired to meet the user command's requirements for wartime augmentation by recruitment of fully aualified personnel or prior service personnel with intelligence-related experience. Recruitment and retention were two goals used to obtain this objective. Recruitment initiatives, to achieve a net personnel gain of five percent each fiscal year included: (1) increased use of existing advertising media; (2) ensuring the Detached Training Sites (DTSs) were aware of current recruiting guidelines; (3) expanding recruiting of prior service personne! with intelligence-related experience; and (4) expanding mailing to potential prospects identified through Headquarters Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC) and Headquarters Air Force Reserve (AFRES) files. Retention initiatives to reduce losses from the AFIR program included: (1) identifying and tracking those people due reeniistment and encouraging their continued participation; (2) meaningful use of people in greater numbers for substantive intelligence projects to provide proficiency and maintain high levels of interest; and (3) maximizing recognition of outstanding performance and significant contributions through awards and decorations. A significant effort in support of the mission during 1982 involved an update of the AFIR Plan FY 1982-1986 (began in 1981). It stressed initiatives to meet five-year objectives and goals, and to meet the existing gap between command augmentation requirements and AFIR strength. The goal of the plan was to reach a higher level of personnel strength and operational capability through three basic objectives. These included employment of reservists in peacetime intelligence functions as an integral part of maintaining proficiency
72 and mobilization readiness; augmentation of active force intelligence operations in peacetime contingencies or wartime mobilization; and achievement of full force manning and full combat readiness.4 ® Colonel Oberst believed that management of a larger intelligence reserve force could be achieved without sacrificing quality. He stated: "The AFIR program is the largest functionally managed Individual Mobilization Augmentee program in the Air Force Reserve and we want to maintain its reputation as the ‘best’ through a challenging, viable, and productive environment."5 Organization The Intelligence Reserve Force Division (AFIS/RE) served both as a staff directorate of AFIS and as the management element of the AFIR program. As the AFIS staff directorate, it continued to be divided intc two major subdivisions: Operations and Readiness (REQ) and Personnel Management (REP). . cad The duties and responsibilities of the Operations and Rea ss Division included developing and employing reservists in the AFIR program in a wide variety of military specialities to maintain or increase their proficiency and mobilization readiness; coordinating intelligence reserve support requirements of the Department of Defense (D0D), Headquarters United States Air Force (USAF), Major Commands (MAJCOMS) and Unified and Specified Commands; coordinating and managing Air Force Intelligence Reserves in support of active intelligence production requirements including local and remote tasking of Detached Training Sites (DTSs), and the evaluation of products and services; coordinating DTS intelligence briefings and _intelligence-block training to Air Force Reserve (AFRES) flying units; developing man-days requirements, Reserve Personnel Appropriation (RPA) and Military Personnel Appropriation (MPA), to provide for operational, administrative, and training requirements for the AFIR program; allocating RPA man-days to fund special tours for training and support of training of IMAs to maintain or increase proficiency and. mobilization readiness; allocating MPA man-days to fund special tours in direct support of active force requirements to meet a temporary active force manning need which could not be met economically by active force resources; and scheduling annual tours for IMAs./ The division also identified and evaluated formal courses conducted for active duty personnel to determine applicability to intelligence reserve proficiency upgrading; developed criteria and requirements for the establishment and conduct of specialized formal courses for the AFIR; selected reserve personnel for skill proficiency upgrade and skill broadening courses; administered skill proficiency upgrade actions; provided staff supervision of the foreign language training program; developed training exercises for use at AFIS/RE DTSs; evaiuated exercise learning outcome; monitored documentation of IMA training folders; developed and briefed concepts, programs and policies to insure that the AFIR program supported active force, intelligence requirements in peacetime and during contingencies as an
73 integral part of maintaining military proficiency and mobilization preparedness; prepared inputs to mobilization plans of the AFIS, Headquarters USAF, and USAF MAJCOMs; represented AFIS at O00, Headquarters USAF, and USAF MAJCOMs; represented AFIS at 000 Headquarters USAF, USAF MAJCOMs and Air Force Reserve conferences relating to the development, use and readiness of the AFIR; prepared command support agreements and memoranda of understanding; organized and coordinated the establishment of AFIR DTSs; provided guidance and monitored Host-Tenant Support Agreements between DTSs and host installations; developed operating instructions (OIs) used in the directorate and the BTSs; prepared analysis to evaluate AFIR program management methods and procedures; and performed staff assistant visits te the DTSs.8 The Personnel Management Division (REP) developed and maintained specialized intelligence reserve personne] data encompassing civilian and military intelligence background, technical and linguistic skills, and active duty tour data; maintained and updated the in-house Automated Data Processing’ System; submitted inputs to the Consolidated Reserve Personnel Office (CRPO) for update of the Advanced Personnel Data System (APDS); administered procedures for the accomplishment of intelligence Reserve Officer Effectiveness Reports (O&Rs) and Airman Performance Reports (Reserve) (APR(R)); reviewed and processed ali reports prior to their becoming an official record; developed and maintained intelligence reserve retention and recruitment prograns; evaluated applicants for the AFIR program; controlled assignment and reassignment actions; maintained master AFIR manning documents; and developed standards and monitored AFIR Officer Unit Vacancy and Enlisted Promotion programs. ap In addition, the division prepared and reviewed AFIR security clearance packages, initiated requests for formal clearances, prepared security clearance status reports and requested special security billets; managed the AFIR  personnei affairs program, including awards and decorations, recognition and appreciation correspondence, and retirements; maintained liaison on reserve personnel related matters with the Air Staff, Air Reserve Personnel Center, USAF Commands, USAF Manpower Personnel Center, and other Separate Operating Agencies (SOAs); monitored CRPO personnel actions on reservists assigned or attached to the AFI{R program; monitored personnel related actions pertaining to a reservists’ career, such as: retirements, good years, promotions, commissioning programs, etc.; administered the Qutstanding IMA: of the Year and Deserving Airman Comnissioning programs; and conducted staff assistance visits. The AFIR program consisted of two organizational elements: the AFIS/RE staff and the field organization. The field organization continued to be divided into seven geographic areas to facilitate field management of Detached Training Sites (DTSs). Each area was supervised by an Area Director (AD), assisted by an Area Operations and Training Officer (AQT), an Area Personnel Officer (APO), and an Area Enlisted Advisor (AcA). All were reservists who performed these duties in addition to their primary responsibility of maintaining
74 mobilization readiness. The AD (a Colonel 0-5) ensured that OTSs were managed in accordance with the procedures established by AFIS/RE. The - AOT and APO (drawn from grades Captain through Lieutenant Colonel 0-3 to 0-5) were the principal action officers for training and operations, personnel requirements, and policy matters. The AFA was the principai advisor in matters concerning enlisted personnel, administration, and security.1l The OTSs were informal administrative entities which trained and GSed reservists in a common geographic area. They were managed by a small staff of reservists who, in addition to meeting training requirements, served in additional duty roles such as commander, operations and training officer, and personnel officer. They were normally located at Air Force installations and provided intelligence support to collocated active and reserve units. They also worked on intelligence projects from other organizations using the special skills available within the DTSs.12 @ A remote flight was established as a geographically separate subelement of a DTS when it had been determined that a valid training opportunity existed. The Board of Advisors (80A) was an additional duty committee comprised of senior members who had experience as ADs, DTS commanders, or in key enlisted positions. The members of the BOA, individuaily and collectively, advised the Director of AFIS/RE on policies and other areas of importance ty the program. They reported to and were tasked by the director.13 * Budget A significant portion of the AFIS/RE budget provided for travel in connection with operational and mission support visits to ‘the reserve DTSs. These visits provided the only effective means of providing on-site direction and guidance from the RE staff on OTS operational support projects and training. Travel to. Area Directors Workshops provided policy, guidance and direction to tne key members of the AFIR progran. 14 had The largest budget expenditure involved communications -- primarily for the usage of WATS telephone lines. The management of reservists required contacting them either at places of employment or at home. Operation of the WATS lines aiso afforded the reservists the Opportunity to contact the RE staff at no expense. These lines remained vital to effective operation and management of the AFIR program, 15 ‘h * The AFIR Factbook contains additional organizational information. It provided the AFIS Commander, key staff personnel, and major active force user agencies with information on significant Management areas of the AFIR program. The Factbook was published twice each fiscal year in October and April (See $0167). The AFIR Hanabook was updated in April. It describes the AFIR program, the functions of AFIS/RE, and the procedures involved with requesting AFIR Support and user participation and contribution (See $0168).