HISTORY OF THE AIR FORCE INTELLIGENCE SERVICE 1 JANUARY - 31 DECEMBER 1984 FORT BELVOIR, VIRGINIA 22060 pe VOLUME | - NARRATIVE AND APPENDICES
HISTORY OF THE AIR FORCE INTELLIGENCE SERVICE 1 danuary - 31 December 1984 Volume I: Karrative and Appendices by BIANE T, PUTREY Chief, Historical Research Office Editorial Assistance by KATHY 4. WARD cc. TE! SCHUYLER BISSELL, Major General, USAF Commander e It
PREFACE MBB he AFIS History for C1984 consists of 12 volumes. The first volume is the narrative account of 434 pages and focuses on significant activity and decisions of AFIS units. The remaining 11 volumes are the documents which support the narrative account. Each supporting document is cited in & footnote, and each 15 assigned an “SD” number, thus allowing the document to be easily identified and retrieved. . The AFIS Historical Research Office also prepared the AFSAC Hiistery for CY1984, consisting of 3 farretive volume and five yolumes of supporting documents. The account of AFSAC within the AFIS History is therefore a condensed version of the separate AFSAC History. Because some aspects of the AFIS History involved sensitive compartmented information (SCI), there is a separate SCI annex to this volume, Annex A. One copy of this is on file in the S€I storage facility used by the Historical Research Office. “© Tne historian wrote the narrative volumes using guidelines in the Editorial Style Guide from the Office of Air orce History and The Uhicago Manual of Style, 13th edition. Some general "rules" followed were to 1) use past tense, 2} use lower case spellings, and 3) rewrite jargon. Researching and accurately writing about the extensive activity of the command element, directorates, operating locations, special staff offices, and worldwide AFSAC units are complicated tasks. The AFIS historian extends a special word of thanks to the AFIS and AFSAC personnel who answered questions and provided documents and inputs. Ia particular, the cooperation of commanders was essential and appreciated, Bains. T Vactag BIANE T, PUTNEY Chief, Historical Research Office . ao & * Aeisfite Pe, anol fomoblarped the Pept oe AEt wi 3, Lonvelend wetth Pranclld » viTEA fork. 1% L gen, elem.
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE SECURITY NOTICE PAGE--.cccceccccesvressccceratererasseeeteeeuer TITLE PAGE sess eceee ener ee en uns eeecuneecseeenreesereeeenaeeeces PREFACE - cee reeeeeeeeee Vs teeecenacecteaessccessearrecnoedsotets I Wl v TABLE OF CONTENTS +s ccesccscessscceecesncsnsecaseaseenssessnesy WIE LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS «+ seer ce cesrcersncenserreerencerstnencaee CHRONOLOGY + cere cece eee etree n crn r enc neneereceneneeererescees o CHAPTER 1 - MISSION, ORGANIZATION, AND COMMAND-+-+ererreereeeee MISSION: ccc e cece cece tee e rent eweceees doves cesrearteensenre ORGANIZATION---++-eeceree sees . AFIS AND AF/IN RELATIONSHIP - PERSONNEL -<-eececeeseeeeree Key Personnelecsscrececnes vena een e sane eeeeeenasneesenene Nanning Strength panes dad eeveassosuseserbssecenevesorseos Pete ca ete e ete ner cnt pernreee Pere reece ee eee eee eee eee Budge AFIS MANAGEMENT SURVEY «+++ e eee cr ceees beneeace seenseceees vs Survey Team and Methods r+srecrsecesscecnensecessearseanee Findings and Reorganizationssrtreresrererereeeerecceaanes Changes Implementedecssccctets reece s eras cecnerrecereccns Implementation Teamers sce cr eres eee ener eceterecerense cen Implementation Partially Halted-+++-++-+- Force Management Resuscitated-s+rrerreeesreerercntreecece Year-End Kesultsececrerecereveevesreevecasenencnrarsssaee PROPOSED LAND SALE++-+++-eeeeeee en enn wetectenees MiSSTONs cece eee n cere reece raeee ener e nee eateepesseneneeenes Personnel -c-sece eer ececn ese eeeeen cess eeneeneneneeeeneneee Unspections<<-sserctescresereceecerescccessscaucccesarens FuRA Prevention Activities«s+recssereesercesererssecerers Ground Safetyscrrter rere ee Complaints and Inquiries:- AFIS SENIOR ENLISTED ADVISOR-- SEIP Pane lecce reer en ceesncecceneresarrescreree CHSAF Selection Procedures-++-+rterseereeeeeens PME Allocationst+tcrrer cer eteceserres de vennoenevcunseners TRY See c nn evee er eae ee ee ee ed End of Tour Reporteresseeeeeee Coed beeen eeneseneeesrenencs Vit XV
ORGANIZATION. sce REORGANIZATION ACTIVITY. +seeecreee Key Personnet-++-+++ Manning Strength: SPECIAL STUDIES +++ eeeeeseeneees D&D Status Reports-sseereae NIE 13-11~XX- . NSOD-103-.~-.» issemination ¢ Goneceeserrenees Coordination on Earth Observations Project: settee Preparation for SALTY DENG+++->> eoevee AFIS Reserve Supportss+csrrereseeere Contract Research: ttrcresrsccrtesneessenesereeraecnrs Data Automation Suppor teeeees Weekly Activity Reports:+7+r+errer ters Kerospace Intelligenceststtsttrrtet? ree Intelligence Briefing Branch--+++ Tnatel ligence WATCH seer eer reacnrace bab ereceaens eee Fxecutive Intelligence INOZ Administration Audiovisual Presentations Presentation Support:+++ Photographic Support-++> Working Space Concerns DIRECTORATE OF TARGETS: MISSION wane eaeewenee PERSONNEL +++ eee Key Personnely+++ Manning Strength: TARGETING MATTERS --- Conferences and Meetings Publications anna teteewneee Hard Target Munitions Project:+++++ Significant TD¥s-+r+rrreere saee Requested Weapons Target List+r+<rs+ Officers Position Description Books+': . MAPPING, CHARTING, AND SEQDESY-+-++-++- 7 Conferences and meetings Sponsored--+++-ere- tates Membership on Committees and Working Groups: NCLG Area Requirementsrerersereeree te paawnaneee aeeceee VIET Deieted per 5 U.S.C. 520d} (1)
Support for Weapons Systemsecerererrecerecerererreeres 65 ERE Requirements Support+-sercerssecuecesecewsssereces 67 Functionat Management Inspection: «+<++sertreseneeseees 6B CBG Personnel and Training Issues-<-+-++sereereeesers 70 CHAPTER LIE ~ INTELLIGENCE EOUCATION AND TRAINING..++.-+eseeees 75 DIRECTORATE OF JOINT SERVICES SUPPORT-<+sssecscescescserecee 77 MISSION: --sserrnvccrercecceaenceustaessscterencerasesaean FF ORGANIZATION: ss eeccceescencscscucsneoneeneeneecs veteecee + 9 PERSONNEL «0 cee reer cece nce racer enevouene Key Personne}ccrrceccrvecccwcrccucarecerecrcccasesenes FT Manning Strength-sssreceesseerssseeseecneseseseeserees 7 TRAINING: oe seen ec eee acces Vea eee renee eee scenes 78 Debriefing of Lt. Goodman (USN}--- . DOD Evasion Charts-crerestecereres DOL virective 1300.7 Revised+-++-- Requirements for Levels B and C Trainingsssrsssseceses 83 € of C Education and Training Materialseceeeeresereres 83 KiGSt RunwkER BG errr reser reraterestarenaesannaarroseses 84 SERE Sominarsrrsceersecsreweserecaneaenarassccseseecee BE ayeaensccoseees FF Representation at CTS Conferencerstterrcreserenererere Participation in Exercises:+++++ . Review of Manuals and Course Standards: Special Experience Identifier for £&0:- LEBRARY ARCHIVES ACTIVITIES + -+escresencceencavcensevecser 96 QUINT SERVICES SUPPORT ++ -e essen sees teceeeree teeeeeese e+ 106 Antiterrorism Activitysssecrsesererercrsnsseresrecsere 100 DOD ERE Procramerrssceceeresasssesencesssscoseceerases JOG Law of War and Legal Mat see » 106 NAM POW Briefing: =< . sete oi 107 seveseceace 107 DIRECTORATE OF SGVIET AFFAIRS-- ++ +e ssecerccenseccceseneesane 169 MISSIGN< ++ css renee ceccaces tae e merece anetecenatareenere FOG ORGANIZATION: -+> Teme raat ate temeaweenetetanenarerees TOG PERSONNEL: ---- POM EEA HERE Hee a eee aera rrenes sseeee 1OD Key Personnel: +++rrs+ Manning Strength: +>: + 110 Manpower Reduction Proposal:+++* teveressereoreee LUD RELOCATION TO BUILDING 1304----- seen eeneeneeeeasereneeses ELT SOVIET AWARENESS + «cs er reste rsr var nsauesnenasetes Statistics on Presentations-+ccrererereeee te eeenceeron LE2 Briefing at UPT Bases--+-+++- seeeseveene EL Responses to Briefingss++++-+6+ peeeneseone F413 Request for Second Briefing Team--+rscrsrcereserereaee LES Ix Deleted per 5 U.S.C. $52(b) (1)
114 Reserve Team Initiative-++-+rs+++ 135 Upgrade of Facility--+++esceeeerrecsenernrs LITERATURE RESEARCH +++ see ser eecerereccceeeene Notice to FBESeaeceesecevevsesnee 116 Soviet Press TranslationsS+++«--+seeeeseese 117 Soviet Military Encyclopedia Project-++++++> il? Soviet Military Thought Serfesesresrssreesne 118 Announcement to All-Union Copyright Agency----+++++r-+ 116 TRAINING: + ceseeseeerees 118 Attendance at Canadian Conference: 138 Formal and Informal Training-+-++-~ 119 Trip to USSR«+-++- PrererTTeererry 119 AFA “Citation of Honor?++ceeseeeres 122 DIRECTORATE OF ATTACHE AFFAIRS-~---++++++-> 123 MISSION OF OIRECTURATE---+-- 223 MISSION OF AIR ATTACHE + 123 POSITIONS MITHIN BAS + +++ esserereeee 124 PERSONNEL ++ ee essere : 425 ATTACHE SELECTEES 125 Attache Selection Panel++-> 126 Attache Selection Criteria: 126 ENLISTED SELECTEES«+-++-++--- 127 TRAINING PROGRAN- +++ re tereeaeee 128 Language Tutor Program +s+ssersereree sevesvavesesen PDB In-Country Language Trainings:+++++ suraerecce L2G Naval Postgraduate School+++-+-rere ese . i29 On Station Language Use- SUPPORT GN STATION: -++++++> STAFF VISITS TO DAGs-+->-++ INCENTIVE SUPPLY PROGRAMS «> +- NEWSLETTER+ ++ errr ee eee sb uesuceerer . : 133 MID-~FOUR REPORTS +++ r+-reseser eee 133 PRUMOTIGN STATISTICS-++-++-+>+++ thee veee 130 UNSCHEDULED RETURKS FROM STATIONS--++-++eeersserere sreee 134 CHAPTER IV —- INTELLIGENCE SUPPORT .-+- ee eee e cee eeeeeeee eeesseee 137 DIRECTORATE GF SECURITY AND COMMUNICATIONS MANAGEMENT ------ + 138 WISSION+ + oe vecee ees ecenuerenrcer errr «e+ 138 ORGANIZATION: + +e ses eee ereer errr rreree reer rss 138 Dual-Katting of Key INS Positionss+ss+++rss+ coves 138 Directorate Structuresss-*+> Oar eeeacescere + 439 MANPOWER << see te cc en enrerces Key Personneltsrrs+ees+ Manning Strength>+ ++: Manning Requirements-+ PROJECT MOVE--s-eees trees PERSONNEL SECURITY--- Statistics<:ssseerers
Polygraph Use "Test!sseecesescsccncusucsscncccners seas $44 For Cause Gischarge Prograticscerseereveresreeercesreee $45 Request for Limited TS Ciearance Authority--++-++-+-++ 145 Conversion to 4C System-+--ses-ese- seasene 145 Microfilming of Records: -+ orere ee ere? sreseee 146 Interpretation of DSM-Iil--- taerereaneneresecasasas $46 ME: pana tedeawcterecaseeree 3465 Publication Managemant«+sesceveserereserccveresseseous I47 Stemming Unauthorized Disclosures+++eresersescessoeres FA? Inspection Program: cscessesacececee Committee Members and Instructors-- SPECIAL SECURITY OFFICE---.-+ tenereees Security Education+s++sercsecsesacweerees Support for USAF CORONA Conferences: Communications and Privacy Support: teeaeeneee 155 Support for USAF SIO Conference + 156 Termination of MREMAUTS + ++esssscerecnracaetees + 156 Automated SCI Document Contro}rseseseserecsere + 457 Statistical Summary-+scscrsrerenesecuverecteeaceteene [57 DIRECTGRATE GF INTELLIGENCE RESERVE FORCES ++++s-eee ener cree 158 ORGANIZATION: «cere re cece ear ee ere esesecenesenserensererae [SR PERSONNEL «++ ++ Pere n ene ser eaeneeunseeeeee Manning Strength--+- IMA MANPOWER STATISTICS «--crerreccrscreeesercenes FLIGHTS ESTABLISHED AND DEACTIVATED ANNUAL ASSESSMEKT OF IARF PERSONNEL - USC 678 POSITIONS «+++ everearereseres . Annual and Spactat Tourse++cetereeeeres Allocation and Reduction of Man-Days--- Deployment to Panamarererercrcee. weerne teeee TRAINING? + +--+ tecteeers tone enone ea vareretesserereereess 166 Course Cancellatins and Cutbacks: seneeneeses 166 Curriculum Revised for AFSC 8075+-+-«+ serene 167 HUMINT Trainingrerstsesseereeseesareereneaesverratenes 167 Foreign Language Training--++++-+** pecenanenaererveeee 159 HAP Reserve Anfexrcesssessaracaves MOBILIZATION AND READINESS «+--+ eer enee Exercise POWDER RIVER++screerseveresesentectecsereeces HP} Exercise ULCHI FOCUS LENS+-+rscescsereserenrecnencnee + 172 MOA with ARPC- secre seseneee seeee . 172 Intelligence Support Projects--- » 172 WORKSHOPS <tc eset eter e rest eecnene A bensaee . 173 Deleted per 5 U.S.C. 552(b) (1)
Tssueseereceeeeccnet a eeeerese + 173 PERSGHNEL SECURITY-«.. . : PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT . - Statisticgerscceeseree Management Actions.+sssrsecreeses Recruiting: +seseceerenecenseeeses Quality Force Issues- Statistics+ss-sresece dase eseneneeee se dedceneereetenesee L7G > 180 DIRECTORATE OF PERSONNEL - MISSION+ +--+ + 180 ORGANIZATION - 180 PERSONNEL +++ +++ : : : 181 Key Personnel++++++ seaneeeerease +» 18) Manning Strengthr-<rsrecreseeeeee . ++ 18] MILITARY PERSONNEL +--+ seaeevocsce + 18h Personnel Programs: + 181 Assignments: + + 164 Officer Hanning: + 184 Enlisted Manning: . » 185 Promotions: + + 185 Military Decorations: +--+ * 186 AF /IN-AFIS Recognition Program 187 CIVILIAN PERSONNEL +++ reer eee sees aes 187 Civilian Mannings ssrsesree Dee e er etneseannerns 187 Program for General Intelligence Personnel: ++ 183 Review of UALASP ++ ceececeereeeeenteeecrenre oy fag OPie Evaluations tte csr sereeerece susueees ‘ + 189 AFR 40-452 Performance Management Program: +++++++++ 19u Merit Pay and Performance or Incentive Awardss«s+++ 291 PROGRAMS MANAGEO BY DP DIRECTORATE ++ --eeeeesreeerecect eee 19] DATA PROCESSING INITEATIVES- +++ e+ esse esse eeerrerereecees 193 CHAPTER ¥ ~ HUMAN RESOURCE INTELLIGENCE: + AIR FORCE SPECIAL ACTIVITIES CENTER. -« Seren newererrereeees ++ 497 MISSION: ce ee reser e ena e ere re eerseree ea renenee . . ORGANIZATION: «++ MANNING: seer se vaneenes 198 HQ ORGANIZATION re reneteaee 199 HQ PERSONNEL +--+ errr recent reeer tees beerass +. 199 Hg MANNING. -- + 200 OPERATIONS --- . . sees «* 200 ANALYSIS OF FILES- +++ ++ 202 REPORT PRODUCTION STATISTICS - DOCEX INITIATIVE: +++s+ers> 203 NCO FIELD OFFICES -- 206 OPERATIONS SUPPORT+++++++++ se teases > 207 PLANS RESOURCES, AND SUPPORT++++reeeereterereree weresseae 232 XIE Deleted per 5 U.S.C. 552(d) 05>
AFSAC's Wartime Posture--+++- tev aarenecene tenseenaenee 212 Mobility Enhancement--+++sereceeceees deed eesesereasnas Reserve Affairsereresreecees aes enenaceeoeves Exercise Activityss++: bee eenenanageees Planseeseeses pe oederesseseeas cescervevesceneneesan 229 Management Effectiveness Inspections: AFSAC Briefing Program---+-+- te veeess Resource Management Fiscal Programs: + ++rrsevsree Budget sae anerener Logistics Mobi lity-cecccesececccnees seaneeeee Career Management and Trainings +--+++ tree see 284 AFSAT OPERATIONAL TRATNING PROGRAM porerere teens ron 246 DETACHMENT 21--+>- ve+ 250 DETACHMENT 22- 254 DETACHMENT 23-++ 2359 EUROPEAN SPECIAL ACTIVITIES AREA-- + 260 PACIFIC SPECIAL ACTIVITIES AREA++ +++ seers eer eer eres eeeenes 269 CHAPTER YI ~ AFIS SPECIAL STAFF-++++++55- bebe ee ber en ee eer eevee 273 HEADQUARTERS SQUADROK SECTION: -+++e ese rseererererercers penne 275 PLANS, PROGRAMS, ANU LOGISTICS DIVISION- +++ +++ 278 WANPOWER AND ORGANIZATION DIVISION: +++ ++ +++ ses 294 COMPTROLLER DIVISION: ++ +rseeer seers . : reser 299 ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION . reve 308 PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICE-- ses 310 CHAPTER WIE ~ AFIS OPERATING LOCATIONS: -+++++--+00reerserees sre 313 AFIS OL-AF-- AFIS OL~N- AFIS OL-ET-» a INDEX < +e enecceccce rere eessneeraerararens even ere radsenenenens G29 SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS DOCUMENTS 1-68 VOLUME TI DOCUMENTS 69-121 VOLUME II] DOCUMENTS 121-125 VOLUME IY DOCUMENTS 126-156 VOLUME V XIII
DOCUMENTS 157-199 VOLUME ¥i DOCUMENTS 200-239 VOLUME VII DOCUMENTS 240-297 VOLUME VITEI DOCUMENTS 297-367 ¥OLUME IX DOCUMENTS 368-390 VOLUME X DOCUMENTS 391-466 VOLUME XI DOCUMENTS 467-504 VOLUME XIT xiv
CHAPTER Fee en ee EE pet tet Mi. LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Co OO Ns wee we pay TLLUSTRAT IONS AFIS Organization Chart Proposed Organization Maj. Gen. dames C. Pfautz Brig. Gen, Pay} H. Martin Col, William B, Sherman Col. Nick Yankowskt Col, Charles kK. Piver iMSot Richard H. Gantzier AFIS Compound, Fort Belyoir Audiovisual Presentations Division {AFIS/INOV} Secretary Yerne Orr in AFIS Compound Staff of Directorate of Joint Services Support {AFIS/INU} Section of Map for Exercise RIvGE RUNNER Section of Map for Exercise RIOGE RUNNER Personnel from Directorate of Soviet Affairs in USSR Maos of Yetached Training Sites AFSAC Organization Chart AFSAC HQ Organization Chart AFSAC Commanders‘ Conference xY Deleted par 5 U.S.C. 352(b) (1)
SANUARY 9-13 7 FEBRUARY 6-10 2? February- 2 March 29 CHRONOLOGY 1984 AIR FORCE INTELLIGENCE SERVICE @ Tne ACS/I rescinded the authority granted to the Electronic Security Command ia 1973 to close "for cause" cases under the Yance memorandum, QP the AFIS inspector general gonduct — Effectiveness Inspection of Ronert Gussault and Mr. dohn Mitchell perticipzted in the debriefing of U.S. havy Lt. Robert ©. Goodman, a naval flight officer, A-6 pombadier/navigetor, flying a combat mission aver Lebanan on & December 1953, who was shot down, captured, and transported to Gamascas, Syria. a In February, the AFIS vice commander responded to Army otficials at Fort Belvoir concerning the proposai to sell the parcel of land between U.S, Route i and the AFIS compound. The vice commander V1 deleted per 5 ¥.5.C. 5520b)(9) < ~ The Directorate of Targets hosted the third 2 nF Target intelligence Conference at = headquarters, Electronic Security Command. x 4 Tre Air Force inspector general y oS conducted a Functional Management inspection of os > mapping, charting, and geodesy functions at AFIS, a Ne six mejor command headquarters, and gtx “ Pa) intermediate neadquarters. Pa + & 2 ~f ¢ The AFIS inspector general ducted a * ement Effectiveness Inspection . FS + ed é » Ed x ¥
requested that the land renazin under the contrel of the federal government. February- MBB tne AFIS Management Survey was underway, October headed by the ACS/I's special assistant, Maj. Gen. dohn S$. Patton, USAFR, retired. MARCH i GB ine Birectorate of doint Services Support assumed responsibility for the Code of Conduct librarian and historian function. QB The Hepping, Charting and seodesy (MCRG) Division of the Directorate of Targets sponsored the fifth Air Force Geodetic and Geophysical Conference, at the Defense Mapping Agency Aerospace Center, St. Louis, missouri. The Office of Personne] Management conducted a one day on-site visit to AFIS at Fart Belvoir. GMB the ACS/1 established responsibilities for the development of 000 evasion chants. 17-27 The = AFIS inspector general cg: ¢ 4 se janagement tffectiveness Inspection off a MBB 3s forit, the Visual Disptay Branch {INOZD) was reorganized and renamed the Audiovisual Presentations Division {INOV}, in Aprit, the Logistics @ivision of the pecial Staff was abolished, as it was absorbed as a@ new branch within the newly designated Plans, Programs and Logistics Division. XVIT Deleted per $ 0.5.0. $52¢d) 1}
aFSaC Commanders’ Conference may 7h} The third annual was held at Fort Belvoir. SURE 6 Sed AFSAC Pamphlet 200-27, “Air Force HUMINT ighlights,” was distributed to the field. 12-14 = AFIS OL-AF hosted the fourth semi-annual Space ~ atelligence Conference, id ) GR in dune, the Birectorate of Intelligence x Reserve Forces proposed to the wirectarate of a Soviet Affairs that a Soviet Awareness Sriefing J Team witain OTS 45 be established. by the end of a 1956, the autioos for the project coming to s fruition looked gooc, te gy a Pr & <3 a JULY 16-19 a The AFIS inspector generat conducted 4 < ement Effectiveness Inspection of Zw - cd In duly 1984, five personnel from the Irectorate of Soviet Affairs traveled on two separate tours ta the Soviet Union. AUGUST 21 August~ The Directorate of doint Services Support é 4 September “conducted Exercise RIOGE RUNNEX at Camp Gawson, Ov West Virginia. 4 : e s “ ¢ a v Pd 2 € XYEIT
QCTOBER i MOVEMBER 5 14 a By the start of FY1985, AFIS had to delete ten = manpower positions. oo Po} sr The AFIS Qperating Location F at Eglin AFB, oF orida, was abolished, and its functions and es resources were transferred to the Air Force sy Tactical Air Warfare Center of the Tactical Air 9 > Command. “ = a < The AFIS inspector general conducted a a Management Effectiveness Inspection ea wf ¥ oe WMD The Napping, Charting and Geodesy {NC&G) 3 Division of the Directorate of Targets hosted and o sponsored the first Air Farce t&> Conference at € dolling AFB. Fs Py Af & In the latter pact of the year, personnel froin the Special Studies Division (INVA) participated in preparatory efforts for ° the SALTY BERG demonstration of air base survivability techniques to taxe place at Spangdahler Air Base, Germany, 1985. ad The director of Manpower and Organization OS/MRP}) concurred with the ACS/I's request to dual-hat the position of assistant for security and communications management {AF/INS} and the director of security and communications management (AFIS/IbS). . The new facilities for the Special Studies ivision (INUA} were officially opened. During the year INGA bad absorbed the INOP functions ang was consolidated at the NPIC. GBB the E44 Comsanders' Conference was held. The Directorate of Targets conducted the winter aesting of the doint Munitions Effectiveness Manual Air-to-Surface Uperetional Users working Group at tne Naval Air Station, Felion, sevade. xX
DECEMBER 1 10 ig 26 31 In ovember, the alS/I designated a team to implement the AF/IN~AFIS reorganization, based on the recommendations fram the AFIS Management Survey. Gn § WUecember, the implementation team was disbanded. MB i= November, the HUMINT Liaison Group (INOH} was reestablished. The positions of director and deputy director oO Security and Communications Management (AFIS/INS) were dual-hatted on the Afr Staff as assistant and deputy assistant for Security and Communications Management (AFIS/INS). AF/INEGL was disestablished, and the billets and personnel were realigned to AFIS under ING, the new Long Range Estimates Division. the ACS/I directed the OACS/I to have AFIS planners contact AFCC ana begin toe design an information systems organization which satisfied the requirements of PAD 84-1. a The revised 00% Girective 1300.7, “Training and Evatuation Measures Necessary to Support the Cade of Conduct’ was issued. The Uirectorate of Joint Services Support Mstributed to each ot the military services the "Requirements for Level & and Level € Training in Support of the Code cf Conduct." The commander of the 1947th HSG concurred with the ACS/I's proposal for designating the ACS/T as the AFIS commander and the DACS/1 as the AFIS vice commander. Approval was for a six-month trial period, effective 31 January 1985. The Uirectorate of Intelligence Reserve Forces managed 2,365 reservists: 1,307 assigned and 53 attached for training. This represented 71 percent manning of the authorized strengti {84 percent officer and 43 percent entisted} of 1,911 positions. RX Deleted per $ U.S.C. 352(b} (3)
In December, the move of the Directorate of oviet Affairs from Building 520 to Buiiding 1304 on Bolling AFB was nearly complete. | In December, the Directorate of Intelligence Reserve Forces received approval to convert existing active duty positions within the directorate to USL 678 positions. In December, the 1954 HUMINT S&T Workshop wes heid at Detachment 22, AFSAC. DURING THE YEAR: There were 25,923 people who attended the briefing presented by the Birectorate of Soviet Affairs at 49 bases. In coordination with the Headquarters USAF and the wir Force Manpower and Personne? Center, the Directorate of Attache Affairs nominated thirty- five officars to the DIA for service in the Defense Attache System, The Directorate of Security and Communications Management inspected ati major command SCi security management offices. Seventy SCIFs were inspected, representing 27 percent of USAF SLIFs. As of Gecember, there were 280 SCIFs accredited, 47 of which belonged to contractors, The Uirectorate of Security and Communications Management supported two CORONA Conferences, Tne irectorate of Intelligence Reserve Forces estanlished two new remote flignts. XX1 vetered per 5 U.S.C. 582(b) (2) Deleted per $ U.S.C. 5526) (t}
The Directorate of Intelligence Reserve Forces scheauled over 2,400 annuel and special tours. The 21,725 man-days committed to these tours equated to approximately 69 man-years of active force support and training. Throughout tne year, the Directorate of ersonsei publicized intelligence training programs availabie to intelligence analysts and managers. S AFIS personnel experienced seven reportable Satety mishaps. @ Betachment 32, PSAS, was awarded the Air Force rganizational Excellence Award. XXII
MISSIGN, ORGANIZATION, AND COMMAND AIR FORCE INTELLIGENCE SERVICE ISS ION The overall] mission of the Air Force Inteltigence Serv? (AFIS) was to provide spectaltzed intelligence and intelligence services to Headquarters, United States Air Force (USAF) “and USAF commanders worldwide. AFIS directed and conducted designated intelligence collection activities, processed and disseminated intelligence and intelligence information, and conducted programs designed to ensure that the Air Force was provided with intelligence systems. Background on Mission Concept The National Security Act of 1947, as amended, empowered the departments of the governmant te collect, evaluate, correlate, and disseminate departmental intelligence. Department of Defense (B98) Directive 5100.1 {AFR 55-43) directed the Air Force to provide an organization capable of furnishing adequate, timely, and reliable intelligence for the Air Force and to furnish intelligence for use within the 000, AFIS was a major element of the Air Force intel} igence organization established to satisfy these responsibilities, ORGANIZATION «& As of 31 December 1984, the AFIS organization consisted of i} @ command element with an inspector general and a sentor enlisted advisor, 2} nine directorates, 3) seven special staff units, 4} the Air Force Special Activities Center {AFSAC}, and 5) five operating lacations. In April 1984, the Logistics, Division of the Special Staff was abolished, as it was absorbed @5 a new branch within the newly designated Plans, Programs and Logistics Division. = Effective 1 October 1984, the Operating Location (OL) -F at Eglin Af8, Florida, was abalishec, and its functions and resources were transferred to the Air Force Tactical Air Warfare Center of the Tactical Air Command. Of the subordinate AFIS units, the Air Force Special Activities Center continued to be the largest, consisting of three types of subordinate elements: special activities areas, detachments, and operating locations.
AFIS ORGANIZATION CHART (8}3 SEkice COMA EWLISTED ADMD SPECIAL STAFF ADMENT STRAT) ¥E DIRECTORATE DIRECTORATE BIVISIO% oF oF IRTELLE SEE ATESCNE ATR ASFATRS MANRGENELT DERECTORATE aE COMP TROLL SI ¥IST adaRE oe z DIRECTORATE oF SECURITY AND WaT, ISTELLIGERCE PLANS, PROGRAM: ? CERTER
AFIS and AF/IN Relationshi AFIS units continued to operate in an interrelated role to the Headquarters, USAF, Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence, which was commanded by a major generazi who was the assistant chief of staff, intelligence (ACS/I).4 His office (AF/IN} consisted of a command element, the Directorate of Estimates {INE}, the Directorate of Intelligence Plans and Systems (I8¥}, and an Assistant for Joint Matters {INd} 5 The commander of AFIS (AFIS/CC} was a brigadier general who was also the deputy assistant chief of staff, intelligence {BACS/1).6 The ACS/I ‘and the AFIS/CC were collocated in the Pentagon and were serviced by the same administrative support personne! and equipment. The vice commander of AFIS was a colonel whose office was located in the AFIS compound at Fort Belvoir, Virginia, Two AFIS directorates were functionally subordinate to the two AF/Ih directorates: the AFIS Directorate of Intelligence Data Management {IND} to the AF/IN Directorate of Intelligence Plans and Systems (INY), and the AFIS Virectorate of Operational Intelligence (ING) to the AF/IN Directorate of Estimates CINE}. In varying degrees the AFIS directorates provided direct service to both AF/IN and AFIS, as did the AFIS Special Staff. PERSGNNEL Key Personne) Throughout the year, Maj. Gen. dames C. Pfautz continued to be the assistant chief of staff, intelligence (ACS/1). Brig. Gen. Paul f. Martin continued as both the deputy assistant chief of staff, intelligence (DACS/1} and the commander of AFIS. Col. William &. Sherman contisued as the AFIS vice commander, and Col. Nick Yankowski continued as the commander of the Air Force Special Activities Center (AFSaS}. Col. Charlies R. Piver replaced Col. William F. Bale as the AFSAC vice commander. Also, Chief Master Sergeant Richard H. Gantzler continued as the AFIS senior enlisted advisor. Manning Strenath For fiscal year 1985 (October 1984 - September 1985) the AF/IN-AFIS manpower authorizations were as follows: AF/IN AFIS TOTAL OFFICER 100 345445 ENLISTED 7 309-326 CIVILIANS 43 222 265 TOTAL 160 aie 1,036
BUD O&M and Investment Funds The operations and management (0&%) budget for FY1985 cont inyed a trend of increased O&8% funding over the fast five years: we FYBL s28% Uver the were aS follows: * Froarans Fusded AFIS BUDGET FY82 FY83 EY84 FY85 OSM Bub $408 $83% $106" Si25e last four years, AFIS investment funds {308G} WWESTMENT (3089 $12Z5K + 3250K * $1,375" + S500K AEGIS funding for FY1985 was distributed among the following programs: Rehoted per 6 U.S.C. $82(b} (2 }
AFIS UNITS COMMAND SECTAQN AFSAC UNITS HO - Ft. Belvoir IN SPECIAL PROJECTS Command Section - 16 - ¢% HE + TSAA TCF*{+Gther MAICOMs/ SOAS) HG - PSAA CHECK ISLAND SPECIAL STAFF & Devactonts COBRA EAR ~ AC ~ MO ~ XP - DA i2 Operating COBRA JUOY - CCQ ~ HG + PA Locations TDHS** {+Other MAICOMs /SOAs} BIRECTORATES SOF TCOPY IRD ~ Intel Data Mgt NISSTRE* INT ~ Targets OTRE for E® INO + Gperetional Intel DALASP** QAx* INS ~ Security & Comn INE ~ History & INH ~ Attache Affairs Special Studies INU + Joint Svs Support INC ~ Soviet Affairs RE + Intel Reserve Forces OP ~- Personnel *ICF, Intelligence Contingency Funds **IGHKS, Intelligence Data Handling Systen; NISSTR, National Intelligence System to Support Tactical Requirements; DALASP, Defense Advanced Language and Area Studies Program; 2A, Quality of Analysis Program. AFIS MANAGEMENT SURVEY For most of the year, an AFIS Management Survey was underway, headed by the ACS/i's special assistant, Maj. Gen. John S. Patton, USAFR, retired. By November, the survey had resulted in significant proposals for reorganizing AF/IN and AFIS. By year's end, some of the key elements of the reorganization plan were implemented, some were discarded, and some still were actively being considered. Survey Teem and Method On 7 February 1984, Maj. Gen. Pfautz, the ACS/T, announced to all AF/IN and AFIS elements that he was conducting a “management survey" of the Air Force Intelligence Service. The ACS/1 stated, "The purpose of this effort is to take an in-depth Jook at AFIS, with emphasis on the functions and responsibilities of the various directorates and other key entities. 1 yisualize this survey primarily as a management analysis rather than a too} for reorganization.” The ACS/1 further stated that his staff assistant, Maj. Gen. Patton, would head the survey team. He
informed the AF/IN and AFIS elements that John S$. Patton had conducted similar analyses at HQ CINCPAC, where he examined the Intelligence Center, Pacific, and at the 544th SIW at HQ SAC. 11 The survey team originally consisted of dohn Patton and two officers from AF/INY, Maj. dohn S$. Dolan and Capt. Kevin Thiesen. (Col. Wifliam 8. Sherman, the AFIS vice commander worked directly yith the team, as did Colonel O*Brien and Lt. Col. Lancaster 42 *NISSTR, National Intelligence System to Support Tactical Requirements; OALAS?, Defense Advanced Language and Area Studies Program; Q4, Quality of Analysis Progran, The survey lasted from February to October 1984. John Patton or ¢é team representative talked witr over fifty key personne! in AF/IN and AFIS, They also studied the way the Army and Navy organized their intelligence activities. @y October, the survey team had formulated general observations about the AFIS erganization and functions and had also formulated reorganiggtion proposals to improve the AF/IN-AFIS organizational structure. Findings and Reorganization Proposals On 2 November, Maj. Gen. Patton presented a briefing for the commanders of AFIS and AF/IN directorates concerning 1} major findings during the management survey and 2) proposed AF/IN-AFIS organizational changes. In part, he presented the major findings as follows: AFIS FRACTURED ORGANIZATION FROM OUTSET - Organized in baste + Command Rank Shifts ~ Not a True Command ~ Limit on Air Staff Billets - Uniqueness of AF/IN + AFIS DIVERSITY: SUBSTANCE AND LOCATION ~ Excessive Span of Control ~ Independent F fefdoms ~ Lack of Communication and Coordination - Six Categories of AFIS Entities AF/IN ~ AFIS RELATIONSHIP + Policy vs. Management and Support + Need for Effective Dual Hatting - Key Perceptions - AFSAC - AFIS Roles Belvoir Syndrome
EVERYBODY IN PERSONNEL BUSINESS AIR STAFE BOARD MEMBERSHIP IMPACT WEED FOR CONTINUITY For the most part, the findings hignlighted negative aspects of the AF/IN-AFIS organization. To correct these negative aspects, Maj. Gen. Patton recommended 2 anew AF/IN-AFIS organizational structure, The proposed organization was as follows: PROPOSED ORGANIZATION ACS & AHS COMMANTER i . 2 E SPEGUAL ADVISERS IMSPESIOR GERERAL SEMDR EMUSHD Aciisce GALS/1 & RFS WCE COMMANDER AES ABST. VICI ee BRASH SPECIAL SAFE ASST FOR Mus MATIERS Graths Oeruty Fog FORCE MAMASEMENT DePUrT 608 SECORHY AKG COMM MGT BiRECTORASE GF ites FSS B SYS QPSRATIONS. _Estieants CURREAT MTCLIGENCE = WNTELUIAGHCE, ATIACGE APPAR =| MOUNT SERWICES id ‘ SUPPORT BAIA wT . ? bear SESERVE FREES ‘ SOVIET AfFARRS . PERSuNEL i se ASSISTANT WIDE COMMANDER 1S DUALAATTED AS THE anetts ; DEPUTT FOR FORCE MAMASEMENT Benatinyal WIHLLEAEE ve we SEPUTY OF DUALHATTED AS Af/ib ASSISTANT 08 ‘ teas acca SECURITY AD COMMUNICATIONS SEARAGEM CAT win eck OPERATING LOCALIOKS
Main Features of Reorganization GD The main features of the proposed organization were: 4 1. Reduce the ACS/I's unwieldy span of contro} over the AF/IN-AFIS organization. QP 2. Designate the ACS/I the commander of AFIS, giving the ACS/2 an AF/IN "hat" and an AFIS "hat", thus dual« hatting him. 3. Gual-hat the DACS/I as the AFIS vice commander - he had been the commander. 4. Designate the AFIS vice commander as the AFIS assistant vice commander. §. Establish 38 Deputy for Operations, which included the Directorate of Joint Services Support (18U}, the Directorate of Soviet Affairs (INC}, the Oirectorate of Targets {INT}, CC&O Imagery {INGA, INGP), Intelligence Research (INO), and the Operating Locations. 6. Establish 2 Deputy for Force Management, which included the Girectorate of Attache Affairs (INH}, the Directorate of Intelligence Reserve Forces {RE}, and the Directorate of Personnel {9F). 7. Dual hat the AFIS assistant vice conmander as the Deputy for Force Management. Designate AF/INYX as having Air Staff policy oversight for Force Management. 8. Gual hat the director and deputy director of the newly astablisned Deputy for Security and Communications Management (INS} as the AF/IN assistant for security and communications management. * Changes Implemented After the Patton briefing of 2 November, some of the proposed changes to the AF/IN-AFIS organization were on the way to being quickly accomplished. AF /IN-AFIS Bual-Hatted On $ November 1584, the director of Manpower and Organization, DCS/MEP, concurred with the ACS/I's request of 12 October 1984 to dual-nat the position of assistant for security and communications management (AF/INS) and the director of security and communications management {AFIS/INS). 70
In part, the dustif ication for the dual-hatting arrangement was as foltows:2 Within AFIS, the Directorate of Security and Communications Management {AFIS/INS) has mission responsibility for management of the Air Force SCI security program and the Air Force Special Security Office {SSO} system, Operating/support functions performes by this directorate are properly assigned at the SOA level. However, AFIS/INS has no counterpart within the existing AF/IN structure. As a result, the Oirector and Deputy Director of AFIS/INS must regularly perform Management Headquarters/Air Staff related functions on behalf of the ACS/1. This situation creates serious problems in relationships with the Intelligence Community, HQ USAF, and Air Force activities. AFIS personne! cannot effectively represent the ACS/I and the Air Staff on such matters while organizationally assigned to a subordinate level. ard The solution is to establish a Security and Comnuaications Management element within AF/IN, 1 am prepared to identify the necessary headroom trade-offs but duplication of management positions between AF /IN and AFIS ts neither cast effective nor practical in terms of trying to separate existing management functions, What 1 propose is a  dual-hatting arrangement, An “Assistant for Security and Communications Management" element {(AF/INS) would be established within AF/IN, consisting of two positions -- one 0-6 and 0-5. These same two positions would be dual-hatted to AFIS/INS so they could continue to fulfill their operating management responstbilittes. The Security Program is a high visibility, extremely sensitive area and this action will satisfy the pressing requirement for INS's key positions to have proper Air Staff credentials. ACS/1 and DACS/i Dual-Hatted Qn 19 November 1984, the ACS/I requested that the commander of the 1947th Headquarters Support Group {HSG) approve the proposal to designate the ACS/I as the AFIS commander and to designate the ODACS/E as the AFIS vice commander on a six-month trial basis, effective 31 January 1985. The request was made to the 1947th commander on. the advice of the AF/MPMPO and the 1947 HSG/MMO representatives. In making the request to have himself duat-hatted, the ACS/T stated:! I}
12 AFIS because of its highly specialized mission and worldwide Intelligence support role, is required to function under the close technical direction and control of the principal Air Staff Intelligence Officer, the ACS/1, This special relationship {5 institutionalized under a dual-hatting arrangement, one where command of the AFIS is exercised from within AF/IN, Currently, Brig. Gen. Martin, the Deputy ACS/I, is dual-natted as the AFIS Commander. This arrangement worked well until this past year when AF/IN was added to the Air Staff Board {ASB} as a voting member. General Martin, who represents AF/IN on the ASB, has had to devote more and more of his time to Board business -- obviously a priority matter. As a result, it's necessary that we refine the existing AF/IN-AFIS dual-hatting arrangement, [| On 26 December 1984, the commander of the 1947th HSG concurred with the ACS/i's proposal for dual-hatting himself and the DACS/E.18 Implementation Team By 19 November, the ACS/I had designated a team to implement the AF/IN-AFIS reorganization, consisting of the AFIS vice commander as chairman, five other primary members, and four adjunct members. The ACS/L approved an "Implementation Team Charter," which directed that the implementation would be completed by 31 January 1985. From mid-November through the first week of December, the implementation team worked diligently toe identify all required implementation actions, designate offices of primary responsibility for the completion of those actions, establish milestones, monitor progress, and take other steps as appropriate to insure a smooth and orderly transition.¢ Implementation Partially Halted In the meantime, the heads of the AF/IN and AFIS directorates considered the impending reorganization, and some responded to it with suggestions for improving the reorganization plan. They had been discussing the plan even prior to General Patton's 2 November briefing, had had lengthy discussions with Patton or his representatives, and continued to discuss the plan after if was “otrictally” briefed on 2 November. As a result of all the reassessment activity going on regarding the reorganization on 6 December 1984, Coleone] Sherman, the implementation team chairman, made an announcement to the implementation team members that was both significant and somewhat
anticipated. He told them that the ACS/I had placed the AF/IN- AFIS reorganization effort in a “hold” status, and that the implementation team was being disbanded. 21 Opposition to Proposed Reorganization Because Colonel Sherman was the AFIS vice commander and implementation team leader, he was in a good position to watch as implementation activity came to a halt. In reflecting upon why the original reorganization plan of 2 November was not implemented, he stated, “Much to General Pfautz's surprise people were ‘pinging’ on him from every direction about why this doesn't work or why that doesn't work, why that's a bad idea, etc." Colone} Sherman continued, “In the words the ACS/I used to me one day about the ‘pinging,’ he said, ‘1 felt like I need a tin hat. "22 Colone? Sherman identified the influential criticism and resistance as coming from five sources: the Directorate of Attache Affairs (INH), the Lirectorate of Intelligence Reserve Forces (RE}, the Directorate of Targets (INT), the Directorate of Estimates (INE), and the directorate of Intelligence Plans and Systems {INY). The main criticisms of the reorganization plan centered on the heart of the plan: 1) the proposed Deputy for Force Management {FM} and 2) the proposed Deputy for Operations {00}. The establishment of the Deputy for Force Management caused concern for INH, RE, and INY. The establishment of the Oeputy for Operations caused great concern for INT and INE. Gpposition to FM The Directorate of Attache Affairs (INH) opposed the rapid establishment of the Deputy for Force Management, because of the disruption and turmoil it would cause as it drew heavily upon the personnel from AFIS and AF/IN to fil} FM's seventeen personnel spaces. The INH directorate suggested spaces be obtained through the slower POM process, and in the meantime, a cadre from three to five personne] be formed to perform the groundwork necessary for the establishment of Fé.24 According to Colonel Sherman, the Otrectorate of Intelligence Reserve Forces {RE} perceived its incorporation into the new Seputy for Force Management as a loss of clear-cut RE identity and a loss of central point of contact for the reservists across the country. The INY directorate saw the establishment of AFIS/FM a3 involving a transfer of some functions from INY to AFIS, which appropriately belonged at the Air Staff Yevet.25 to
Opposition to DO & Also according to Colone] Sherman, the INT directorate perceived its incorporation into the Oeputy for Operations as an organizational step backwards, since INT had just recently acquired directorate status within AFIS. The INE directorate objected to the Deputy for Operations when it looked as if the head of the new Deputy for Operations would be a colonel with Air Staff experience from INE, whose rapid departure would degrade the performance of the INE mission. Also, two divisions, INGA and INOL, were to be functionally reorganized from INO which was functionally responsible to INE. The commander of INE stated, “You can reorganize INQ, but I'm going to task directly to those people.” Manpower Cuts & major difficulty also besetting the reorganization activity was that AFIS was forced to cut ten manpower positions by the end of fiscal year 1985, in the process of reorganizing, directorates were asked to consider manpower cuts and respond to the AFIS vice commander with explanations of how the manpower cuts would affect the directorates’ mission. According to the vice commander, “Undermining the reorganization effort, too, was a fact that by the end of this fiscal vear, AFIS had to take 2 manpower cut of about ten spaces. So im the process of trying to force the reorganization, 1 also tried to find those tern spaces from somewhere. It was kind of adding the extra straw. ‘Hey, not only are you taking my function away, you are going to try to do it with less people.’ It really was too big of a bite to swallow. “27 Force Management Resuscitated The proposal for the Oeputy for Operations was laid to rest quite easily. The Deputy for Force Management, however, was &@ concept and proposal that would not pass quietly away. On 20 December 1984, Lt. Col. Lancaster of AF/INYR prepared a staff summary sheet on the establishment of an “AF/IN Force Management Activity.” The proposal and staff susmary sheet was given wide circulation for coordination and comment. In part, the proposal stated: During the recent AFIS management review, Genera! Patton's study group recommended formation of an AF/IN Force Management Directorate within AFIS which would consalidate on-going AFIS personnel activities and execute Air Force intelligence force management, training and career development activities. The proposal recognizes that establishment of such an organization has significant tong term benefits for Air
Force Intelligence. The proposal also recognizes that development of Air Force-wide policy and priorities for this function would remain an Air Staff function based an direction from the ACS/I. Additional review of staff comments regarding this proposal led to a decision by the ACS/I to pastpone the consolidation of personnel functions presently performed by AFIS/DP, AFIS/INH, and AFIS/RE inta a new organization. However, the establishment of a force management activity responsible for execution of AF /TN policy and monitoring on-going force development, training and career enhancement for the Air Force Intelligence community remains a viable recommendation. We believe the new force management activity shout e@ implemented as an AFIS directorate reporting directly to the AFIS Assistant Vice Commander (current Vice Commander position). The scope of execution responsibilities of the new directorate wilt be closely related to intelligence career development and training policy developed by INYX, Much tasking for development and execution of the intelligence force data base wilt derive directiy from the ACS/L, However, these actions will atso be related to policy and programmatic functions which reside in INYX, Exact procedures for impiementing/executing alicy and tasking and for maintaining proper organizational relationships will be aadressed in an implementation pian and the development of necessary mission documents (regulations/SOPs/etc). We odelieve the initial cadre for an organization responsible for the functions described at Attachment 1 can be formed from existing AF/IN + AFIS resources without affecting current operational activities. The final size and configuration of the organization can evolve based on the development of a charter, documentation of responsibilities and analysis of the projected workload necessary to perform the functions. In addition to assuming responsibility for many on-going activities, the initial cadre would be charged with the development of the revised regulations required to implement its activity, developing position descriptions, and recommendations required to implement its activity, developing position descriptions, and recommending the final size of the activity. These items would be fully staffed within AFIS ~ AF/IN and the Air Staff prior to implementation, By 31 December, the AF/IN and AFIS directorates were still Considering the latest Force Management proposal.
Year-End Results The year ended without the "heart" of the reorganization plan deing implemented, that is, without the establishment of the Deputy for Force Management and the Deputy for Operations. Only the former was stitl a viable proposal. In 1984, the management survey and the reorganization did accomplish the following: 1. Approval to dual-hat ACS/I as the AFIS commander 2. Approval to dual-hat DACS/I as the AFIS vice commander 3. Approval to dual-nat AFIS/INS - AF/INS 4. Decision to designate an AFIS assistant vice commander SECURITY WORKING GROUP Deleted per 5 U.S.6. 352¢b} (1)
As a result of the security survey, the AFIS vice commander established an Information/Physical Security Working Group, chaired by Colonel Piver, the AFSAC vice commander, to develop specific recommendations on physical security, including cost data, impact statements, and required action items. Membership on the group consisted of representatives from AFIS/RE, INU, OP, U6, AC, XPL and AFSAC/ING, INX, and Det 22.32 an The security working group met in October, and prior to the meeting a detailed survey of the physical Jay-out of each building in the compound was underway. Shortly after the meeting, the reserved parking signs were changed to a numbered system, and large fence signs identifying the AFIS compound were removed. By the end of the year, Colonel Piver’s working group had made headway in accomplishing the group’s mission. PROPOSED LAND SALE In February, as a tangent to the terrorist threat considerations, the AFIS vice commander responded to Aray officials at Fort Belvoir concerning the proposal to sell the parcel of land between U.S. Route 1 and the AFIS compound. The vice commander requested that tne jand remain under control of the Delered per $ 0.8.¢- $52¢b) (2) paleted pet 5 U.S.C. 352¢b) C1}
federat government. He also identified the AFIS resources at a limited Priority ¢ level, AFR 207-1, which required the ability to maintain a reasonable means of intercepting and neutralizing a covert intrusion into the area. GBD the vice comnander explained the following: bcd Previously, because of the internal security considerations, the current minimum public awareness, and practically non-existent public traffic near the compound which allows us to maintain a tow profile, we have not felt a compelling need to employ the additional security measures of armed guards at entry points. If, however, the subject parcel of land was no longer under the direct control of the Federal Government, we would de required to reassess the threat to our security, and higher tevels of security would have to be employed to ward off the increased possibility of pilferage, vandalism, and the increased probability of being directiy targeted for espionage. An upgrade to the Prierity 8 Resource Jevel would almost assuredly be @ necessity requiring positive access contro] to our aree.7 By the end of the year, the proposal te sell the parcel] of land was nc longer being actively considered by the Army officials at Fort Selvoir. IMSPECTOR GENERAL MISSION eS The Office of the Inspector General (1G} was responsible to the S commander for the optimum effectiveness of the USAF inspection, safety, investigation, and complaint programs within AFIS. it reported directly to the commander the management effectiveness of individual units and command-wide functions, as observed during inspections. it alse acted as the management advisor for all command level activities, Personnel On 26 Rovember 1984, Lt. Col, William R. Burton replaced ut, Col, C. Wayne Burridge, whe retired from the Air force. Lt. Col. Surton was previously assigned to the AFIS Directorate of Security and Communications Management, Pentagon. On 15 December, Maj. dames C, Jacoway assumed responsibility as an AFIS isspector, replacing Maj. Raymond €. Compton, who left the iG office on 30 duly ta retire from the Air Force. The administrative NCOIC continued to be SSqt Edward C. Colding.
Inspections Management Effectiveness Inspections a. Management Effectiveness Inspections (MEIs} were conducted at AFIS subordinate organizations every eighteen to twenty-four months. These inspections, conducted according to AFR 123-1, "The Inspection System," examines al} aspects of the activity’s function. This included inspecting organizational leadership and management as they were reflected in mission and functional area performance, installation support, “peopie” programs, service to users, and compliance with directives. During 1984, MEIs were conducted at the following locations (the ratings indicated were for "overall management"}:3 Intelligence Oversight Inspections The AFIS/IG monitored intelligence oversight to ensure that AFIS complied with Executive Order 12333, “United States Intelligence Activities." The inspector general performed this task during Management Effectiveness Inspections by observing unit activities governed by 1) Executive Orders, 2} Department of Defense Regulation 5240.1-R, “Procedures Governing Activities of DOD Intelligence Components That Affect United States Persons,“ 3) AFR 12363, “Intelligence Oversight,” and 4) AFR 200-19, “Conduct of Intelligence activities .°4 peleted per $ U.S.C. §$2¢b) (5) TG
During 1984, the AFIS/IG conducted oversight inspections during each of the five MEI inspections. acn quarter the [IG prepared reports of Dversignt inspection activities and forwarded them to HQ Air Force Inspection and Safety Center/16Q1, Norton AFB, Catifornia, in accordance with AFR 200-19, “Conduct of Intelligence Activities.” These reports listed current activities and proposed future inspections .49 Qver-the-Shoulder Inspections Over-the-Shoulder Inspections (OTS1} were inspections performed by the AFIS/I1G during an AFIS organization's self- inspection progran. Evaluations included mission-ortented inspection standards, checklist utilization, and team management. The AFIS/16 performed OTSIs during 1984 at the following AFIS elements and made the following overall ratings: 1. $-6 January 1984 - The inspector was Maj. Raymond Compton, and the overall rating a 2 26-29 February 1984 : »- The inspector was Maj. ae Compton, and the overall rating was 3. 14 March 1984 - The inspector was Lt. Col C. Wayne Burridge, and the overall rating was 4. 30-31 Mey 1984 - The inspector was Maj. Raymond Compton, and the overall rating was 5. 15 May 1984 - The inspector was Lt. Col. C. Wayne Burridge, and the overall rating was &. & June 1984 -+- The inspector was Maj. Raymond Compton, and the overall rating was 7. 28 dune 1984 ~ The inspector was Lt, Col. C. Wayne Burridge, and the overal? rating was 8. GMM. 12 July 1934 - The inspector was Lt. Col. Cc. Wayne Burriage, and the overall rating was 9 zane. 17__July 1984 - The i nspector ow Maj. Raymond Compton, and the overat} rating : peleced per 5 U.S.C. 5520) (5) g.c. 552(b) (5) natered pet 3 U+
10 Cae, 14 August 1964 - The inspector was Lt. Col. C. wayne Burridge, and the overall rating was FRA Prevention Activities During the year, AFIS/IG implemented within the compound, AFR 123-2, “Air Force Fraud, Waste, and Abuse (FWEA} Prevention and Detection,“ In conjunction with this program, AFIS/IG publicized FWEA information to al} AFIS elements. The office sant monthly reparts on AFIS FWA prevention activities to HQ AFISC/CSX, Norton AFB, California, and Tater to HQ USAF/IGO, according to command directives.5? Ouring 1984, AFIS/IG conducted five FHEA conferences in conjunction with Management Effectiveness Inspections of subordinate AFIS — GMB AFISG investigated four instances of suspected FHEA invelving AFIS elements; however, none of the allegations were substantiated. The general subjects of the four FwaA allegations were: Ground Safety The AFiS inspector general was charged by the AFIS commander to manage al} aspects of the AFIS command-wide ground safety program, this included the implementation of AFR 127-2, “The U.S, Afr Force Mishaps Prevention Program,” AFR 127+4, “Investigating and Reporting U.S. Air Force Mishaps,” and AFR 127~ 12, “Air Force Occupational Safety and Health Programs. In addition, the inspector general prepared seasonel safety letters and messages and distributed ground safety information to all AFIS elements. The 16 maintained close coordination with the safety offices at Bolling AF” Fort Belvoir, and the Pentagon, 60 During 1964, AFIS suffered the foltawing reportable mishaps: TYPE OF INJURY INJURY /BAMAGE DAYS LOST COST Col. injured Cut to right 9 $1530 working with thums and finger power tools, off-duty peteted per 5 U-S.C. 552¢b} (5) deleted per 5 0.5.0. §52(b} (5)
TYPE OF INGURY SSgt. injured playing racquetball, off-duty it. Col, injured playing softball, off-duty Maj. injured working on patio, off-duty SSgt. injured playing basketball, off-duty MSgt injured in vehicle accident, off-duty Maj. injured in fail on ice, off-duty INJURY /DAMAGE Lower back strain Hyper-extended leg and strain to left thigh Lower back strain Left ankle strain Multiple injuries: bruises, cuts, sprained foot, broken ankte Broken right teg Complaints and Inquiries a The inspector genera} investigated numerous comptaints during the year, and these were of a privileged anc personal AFR 123-11 governed the Inspector General Complaint The areas of complaint ingui 1 nature. Program. following: AFIS SENIOR ENLISTED ADVISOR SEIP Pane} and DAYS LOST i ro a 2 Cost $120 $850 $340 $2ag 33000 $3570 do the basa CHSgt Richard 4. Gantzler chaired the Senior Enlisted Intelligence Program (SEIP} pane} on 3 February 1984. volunteer packages were submitted, however, the Military Personne! Center determined that seven were ineligible due to assignment restrictions. The panet considered grade, time breadth and depth of experience in intelligence, military education, and the assignment college grades, Twenty-five service, professional airman performance ratings, jimitations or restrictions the individuals pelered per 5 8.$.C. 552(b) 05)
stated in their volunteer statements. Five primaries and two alternates were nominated from the field of eighteen, The Air Force had a quota of five for the course.63 CMSAF Selection Procedures Also in February, Chief Gantzler surveyed all the chiefs in AF/TN and AFIS about the draft proposal from the chief master sergeant of the Air Force (CMSAF} concerning CMSAF selection procedures. The major issue raised was with the mandatory. in- residence requirement for USAF Senior NCQ academy completion. After giving 1% long thought, the chief recommended that the {n- residence requirement be retained.64 PMc &tlocations In Mey, the chief informed AF/IN and AFIS personnel about why they had so few allocations for professional military education. He stated:55 We've had a bad couple years with few allocations. Things will be better next fiscal year, but that doesn't help make up for the peaple who have missed the opportunity. Here's how it happened: Since we don't have our own PME center we had to rely on other MAUCUMs to provide quotas. Neither we nor MPC hud any leverage on the MAJCOMS to ensure we got a fair amount -- until this year, Now MPC has the clout and has used it to ensure we have equal oppertunity. Our opportunity rate for FYGS is right on the mark. 1 think we can do even better, though, by keeping in close contact with our local PME centers and getting any slots opened by last- minute cancetlations. SMSgt fd Masek will represent us at the PME conference this summer and get to know the faces of the people who can do us some goad in this ared. oF FOYs Throughout the year, Chief Gantzler made trips to Air Force intelligerce organizations to learn about the working conditions, living conditions, and canceras of the enlisted force. He also wanted to “show the flag‘ indicating, by his presence, a concern for the welfare of the enlisted force by the leadership in Washington. He made trips to various locations in CONUS, Europe, and the Pacific. Some of the topics he discussed anc reported on were as follows: assignments; delays in receiving clearances; enlisted recognition; “renorming" general AQE scores for the 201 23
career field; maintenance of target folders; unchallenging ighs> airman performance ratings, and intelligence training courses. Ead of Tour Report Chief Gantzier was scheduled to retire from the Air Force on 1 February 1985. On 31 December, he wrote his end-of~ tour and end-of-career report. In his first item he stated the following to the leaders of AF/IN and AFIS:87 Leadership and communications: I am convinced that the people in the Air Force Intelligence Service and, in fact, the people throughout the Air Force respond in a positive way to leadership from you gentlemen, They respond, that is, if they know what it is you want and need. Therein lies the problem. Most often, the rank and file don't know what direction you are headed inj they don’t get the word, or, when they do, it is garbled. The problem, as i see it, is that we have ¢ very large communications gap below the director level}. People aren't made to fee) they are part of the overall organization. We have separate fiefdoms to which people belong. Cotone] Sherman, Major Yarc, MSgt Horne, and | have all tried to work that problem for you within AFIS by visiting the work centers and talking with the people. We have opened up some lines of communications, out others are still closed. I have tried to work some of the same problems from the Air Force Intelligence perspective, {[ mat with ¢ bit more success outside AFIS because 1 represented the ACS/1. SOLUTION: CV, CCQ, CCF, and CMS should continue to move about the command. CMS should visit AF intelligence activities world wide. It should be emphasized (probably best handled in staff meeting and letter} that the CEQ, CCF, and CMS represent the AFIS cotmander and the ACS/I, Additionally, 1 recommend you consider having a quarterly commander’s call for AFIS +» to include AFSAC. The chief also discussed the need for a security specialist for AFIS, the enlisted/officer Christmas parties, and CMS office space in the front office. He concluded by saying, "I have received outstanding support from you gentlemen during my tenure."
@ Brigadier General Pau? H. Martin, Deputy Assistant Chief of Staff, elligence, and Conmander of the Air Farce Intelligence Service
Colonel] William 8. Sherman, Vice Commander of the Air Force ateiligence Service
Colonel Nick Yankowski, Cowmander of the Air Force Special ctivities Center
‘ Colonel] Charles R. Piver, Vice Coomander of the Air Force Special ctivittes Center
@ Major General James C. Pfautz, Assistant Chief of Staff, ntei Fioence
ee OMWGgt Richard H. Gantzler, Senior Enlisted Advisor of the Air Force Intelligence Service
a Aerial Photograph OY"TRERIF Force Intelligence Service Compound ocated at Fort Belvoir, Virginia.
CHAPTER 11 INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS GIRECTURATE GF OPERATIONAL INTELLIGENCE DIRECTORATE OF TARGETS
DIRECTORATE OF OPERATIONAL INTELLIGENCE MISSION & 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, missfon, or force deployment, on a worldwide basis. Some examples of the intelligence functions 1NO provided are the fotlowing: analysis of indications of potential hostile activities against the United States or its allies; analysis of current air operations; trends and implications of current worldwide developments; evaluation of aerospace related signais intetligence (SIGINT) to determine capabilities, vulnerabilities, and trends of foreign aerospace forces; liaison with the other services and DOD and non~DOD government agencies on matters that pertained to operational intelligence and SIGINT evaluation; and technical authority in intelligence matters related to operational support and defense analysis. ORGANIZATION The Directorate of Operational Intelligence (INO) was operationally responsible to the Directorate of Estimates {AF/INE), while the AFIS organization provided administrative support. At the end of the year, the iN0 directorate consisted of six units, five of which were divisions: 1) Special Studies Division {INOQA}, Jocated at the Washington Navy Yard, 2) Long Range Estimates Oivision (INOL}, located at Bolling AFB, 3} Intelligence Research Division {INQL}, located in the Friendship Annex of the National Security Agency, near the Baltimore-Washington International Airport, 4) Aerospace Intelligence Division {1802}, located at the Pentagon, 5) Audiovisual Presentation Division (INQU}, located at the Pentagon and Fort Belvoir, and 6} Human Resources Intelligence (HUMINT) Liaison Group (1NGH), consisting of just two staff members, located at Fort Belvoir. REORGANIZATION ACTIVITY @ During the year, the INO directorate experienced significant organizational changes. The Special Studies Division *The CY84 History for INQI is in Annex A to this history, an Scr annex, which is on file in the SCIF used by AFIS/HU. Also included are portions of the INOA and INOZ Histories. 27
(28 (IHO&) absorbed the Imagery Research Division (INOP). The reorganized INOk division consisted of three units:  Administra- tion, Imagery Support, and Denial and Deception. For the first part of the year, INOA was split into two geographical locations. The imagery analysts were situated on the fifth floor of the National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC) at the Washington Navy Yard, and the non-imagery personnel were located in Building 520, Bolling AF8. In September, the organization was physically united as both elements occupied new spaces on the NPIC first, floor. The new INOA area was officially opened 14 November 1984, Effective 1 December 1984, AF/INEGL was disestablished, and @ billets and personnel were realigned to AFIS under INOL, the new Long Range Estimates Division. The duty location of INOL remained at Bolling AFB.4 During April 1984, the Visual Oisplay Branch (INOZD) was reorganized and renamed the Audiovisual Presentations Division {INQV) and organized into three branches, one located at Fort Belvoir and two at the Pentagon, One of the Pentagon branches was devoted principally to the AC$/I's morning Current Intelligence Briefing. The reorganization allowed INGV to add five additional personne] to its staff, two civilian positions at grade GS-11 and three military E~6 positions. The additional billets were in accordance with the ACS/I’s initiatives to reconstruct his Current intelligence Briefing arid to support additional requirements from other Air Force commands. On 3 August 1984, the Aerospace Intelligence Oiviston (INOZ}, which Rad lost the INOZD Graphics Branch when it became the INOU division, created a new branch, Executive Intelligence CENOZE) 6 Thus, INOZ continued to be composed of three branches: Briefing Branch (INOZA}, Intelligence Watch (INGZC), and Executive Intelligence (INOZE).? The rationale for the creation of INOZE was as follows 72 “ In September 1983, the ACS/I directed the publication of a new daily intelligence product ~~ the Air Force Intelligence Morning Highlights. INER tasked two personnel, a LTC/8075 and a SSgt/702 to produce this new document. INE subordinated these personnel to the Regional Estimates Division (INER}. These individuals were also given responsibility for developing and maintaining AF/IN-AFIS Threat Briefings to be given by the ACS/T, D/ACSI, and others in the AF/IN-AFIS hierarchy. It was soon evident neither the rank (LTC) nor the subordination to INER was appropriate for these tasks, and a captain was drawn from INOZA to replace the LTC, INTER is an analytical division, not usually
involved in the process of editing and disseminating intelligence products. Both individuals were resubordinated to I1NOZ, the division responsible for the production “process” and for producing AF/IN's key {intelligence product, the Air Force Intelligence Daily. while the “Highlights” product and the Threat Briefing draw support from INOZA (Editing and Sriefing Branch) and INOZC (Intelligence Alert Branch), and are logically the domain of INOZ, they are so unique in timing and design that their creation and maintenance require a separate organization. Personne? assets to create the branch will be drawn from existing INE billets: Maj 8075 UMDs 004583, Capt 8075 UMDE 005082 and SSgt 702503 UMGe 003965. Creation of the new branch will streamline directorate and division control over the new intelligence products; provide more appropriate authority for the author of these products, and facilitate assigning manpower to this important function. In late November and December 1984, INUH, the HUMINT Liaison Group, was reestablished. it had been disestablished in 1983 when personnel assigned to it were assigned to other billets. The General Lefense Intelligence Programs (GDIP), however, allowed for new personne} to fill the officer and enlisted slots which formed INGH, The INQH group was to provide an “interface” between AF/IN-AFIS analysts and the Air Force Special Activities Center (AFSAC). According to a draft memorandum of agreement between the comuander of AFSAC and the director of Estimates {INE}, the INQh was to do the following: 1) Establish and maintain an Air Force HUMINT Orientation Program for AF /IN-AFIS ¢ 2) Assist AF/IN-AFIS analysts in writing and validating HUMINT collection requirements 3) Follow-up on requirements to ensure analysts needs are serviced 4) Arrange for AF/IN-AFIS analysts to participate in source debriefings when appropriate and operationally feasible 5) Coordinate analysts participation in HUMINT collection planning when required 6} Research HUMINT reporting for AF/IN-AFIS analysts and provide inputs to AF/IN-AFIS assessments via BIAOLS/COINS, other data bases, and direct interface with HUMINT collectors 29
7) Provide HUMINT collectors with AP/IN-AFIS analysts evaluations and assessments of HUMINT reporting 8) Help AF/IN-AFIS analysts provide intelligence analysis and background information to aid in HUMINT collection planning & 9} Serve as an Air Force representative on the SEEK Analysis roup 10) Serve as the Air Force focal point for ensuring that USAF MAJCOMS and Unified Commands have access to Air Force HUMINT reporting PERSONAEL Key Personne! a Col. Richard J. O'Lear continued as the director of the Directorate of Estimates (AF/INE}], and Col. Charles G. Shankland continued as the deputy director. The AF/INE had operational control of the Directorate of Intelligence Operations. Lt. Col. Christopher Maniscaico, the head of the Special Studies Bivision (1NOA), retired from the Air Force effective 7? May and was replaced by &t. Col. Robert K. Tiernan. Lt. Col. William R. Hudson replaced Lt. Colt. Richard L'Heureux as chief of the Aerospace Intelligence Division (INQZ}. Lt. Col. Gerald Bonoyan was chief of the INO! division, having replaced Lt. Col. Charlies T, Cheek. it. Col. Thomas Gmuer replaced Lt. Col. Gary Potter as chief of the INQ. division. Capt. Sherill A. Hutchenson was the last chief of INOP before it merged into INOA. Mr. Kenneth Caldwell was the chief of the new Audiovisual Presentation Divisign {INOV}, having been the chief of the INOZD branch from 1972. Manning Strength g . @ As of December 1984, the authorized strength of AFIS/INO was aS ol lows: AUTHORIZED* OFFICERS 35 ENLISTED a7 CIVILIANS 31 TOTAL $3 *These figures do not include the AFIS billets in AF/INEG (AFIS/INOZBEG), AF/INEK {AFIS/INUZBEK), AF/INER {AFIS/INOZBER}, or AF/INET (AFIS/INOZBET). They do include figures for AFIS/INOA, INGL, INGH, INOI, INGIA, INOI8, INOIC, INQU (Belvoir), INOU (Pentagon}, INGZ, INOZA, IHOZB, and InozE 12
SPECIAL STUDIES The Special Studies Division (AFIS/INOA) was the Air Force executive agent and the ACS/I's designated representative for all-source analysis, reporting, and intelligence production on ail foreign denial and deception {080}.* It provided support to the Air Force, the intelligence community, and the fational Command Authority on issues concerning D&D and provided oad materials and information to the major commands. It pravided tailored imagery analysis and exploitation products for use in preparing Air Force intelligence estimates, interagency intelligence memoranda, and Jong-range analyses and assessments regarding enemy aerospace force capabilities or systems deployments. It also coordinated with the Air Training Command to provide Air Force intelligence schools with current Dad training materials for their use, atid it maintained the all-source Air Force denial and deception data base. GRD Status Reports *In 1984, “denial and deception“ (080} replaced the term “camouflage, concealment, and deception” (€C&0), beginning with INUA‘s Status Report, 29 Aug 84. This was done because the term came into conmon usage during the initial work on the Denial and Deception Analysis Committee {ObAC} and the widespread assumption that the usage would become comton by “diktat." It had not. “31 Deleted per 5 U.S.C. 552(b} (1)
Concerning the “flaw factor, Major Townsend explained the following: “There were two problems articulated concerning the ‘flaw factor.’ The first questioned whether the flaws noted in Soviet strategic 0&2 programs were not in fact intentional. The response notes the flaws detected were fiaws. The second objection noted that by definition an unflawed deception would not be detected. It is possible this is occurring presently. There is no retort to this."¢6 Deleted per $ U.S.C. 592¢b}(%) « 552¢b) (1) pelered per 5 U.S.
Dissemination of D&D Information Throughout the year, the Special Studies presented briefings and participated in purpose of “resensitizing" the U.S. policy-makers to foreign Division discussions with the intetligence community and D&D activity. The INOA division considered itself the leader within the intelligence community concerning denial and deception matters. The following are examples of INQA's efforts to influence thinking about and awareness of O&0 activity.2 peleted pet 5 U.S.C. 552¢b} (33 a 2 > v) < a a a “ a e nm be é a 9 é Py rn a“ 2 a
. $52(b) GQ) ” > “ “ ¥ om 3 2 -— 2 a fee
~~ AFIS/INGA is supported by: - DIA {Intelligence products, access to AIRES and lies a especially CAMCOX, printing of publica- tions, and imagery reproduction} ~ NSA {Intelligence products, access to COINS, especially SOLIS) + CIA {Intelligence products) ~ NPEC (Imagery, iatelligence products, and access to NOS) ~ AFSAC (Intelligence reports and HUMIRT tasking) GB ~~ the primary users of AFIS/INGA’S products - ACS/I and CSAP ~ USAF MAICOMS ~ USAF intelligence schools . + AF Combat Survivability Steering Group ~ Combined Arms Combat Development + B&D Technical Review Group peleted per 5 U.S.C. $52(b} O} 5.6. 35200) peleted pet 5 U.
During the year representatives from INGA also briefed instructors and Students at the 3480th Technical Training School at Goodfellow AFB, Texas, the 3420 Technical Training Group, Lowry AFG, Colorado, ahd the United States Air Force Academy. At the technical training factlities, the INOA personne? assisted with developing and infusing 0&0 material into school and training program curricuta.43 Deleted per 5 TSC $52¢b) (1)
Coordination on Earth Observations Projects On 20 September, Capt, Sherrill A. Kytchinsos of INGA visite the Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas, Earth Observations Projects Office. This office was responsible for ali hand-held imagery taken on board shuttle missions. tts primary tasks included selecting imagery requirements for each mission, preparing prelaunch training aids, training astronauts, and post Jaunch developing, cataloging, and distribution of imagery. Captain Hutchinson met with the manager of the Space Shuttle Earth Observation Project and an Army major who was a NASA astronaut. She was given ample opportunity to review imagery teken on four stuttle missions. Most shots were of cloud or geological formations; however, same were goad enough to do order-of-battle counts, such aS large ships. She selected fourteen shots, including some of the Persian Gulf, Red Sea, Strait of Hormuz, which could be of use in morning briefings. In addition, she received copies of imagery catalogs for previous missions and had INOS placed on distribution for future misstons.45 Preparation for SALTY DEMa In the latter part of the year, personne! from the Special Studies Division participated in preparatory efforts for the SALTY DEMO demonstration of air base survivability techniques to take place at Spangdahler Air Base, Germany, 29 April - 17 May 985. The demonstration was to consist of air attacks (FB-111, F~ 4£, A-10, and F-16}, ground attacks {Special Forces simulating Spetznaz forces}, and the required responses. The denial and deception techniques to be demonstrated were to disorient the attacks. Components of the D&D scheme were to be the following: camouflage, false operating surfaces, decoys, radar corner reflectors, large area smoke, and tactical deception base tevel practices,4 ae The Special Studies Division critiqued the “SALTY DEM Test Plan," “HQ USAPE/DOXS Plan XXX SALTY DEMO 85," and “SALTY peteted per $ 0.8.6. $52(b} (1)
DEMG 85 CC&O Milestones," and established direct contact with SALTY DERO planners. By November, Major Townsend of INOA was able to report the following: "The SALTY DEMO Ccah Demonstration appears on-track and well-conceived." At that time INOA was considering supporting SALTY DEMO by providing a video briefing of world-wide denial and deception associated with air base survivability.47 On 23 November, Major Townsend noted, “SALTY SEMOQ will be big in the Tactical Air Force and we will Fook good if we do good.“ He also nated, “In a conversation with a recent USAFE/INGA returnee, denial and deceptian is an extremely Tow priority at USAFE, It basically is not worked. 1 personally believe that if we can get the CAMCON* data base really on-line, MAJCOMs will be able to more efficiently incorporate D&D into their Intelligence awareness. Presently, it simply requires too much research time, “4o AFIS RESERVE SUPPORT Guring the year, the Special Studies Division continued to integrate Air Force reservists into the denial and deception field. The division was relying on reservists to assume a greater responsibility in developing the Oenial and Deception bata Base (CAMCOK}, in duly, the reserve Detached Training Sites (DTSs) involved with 080 activity were DTS 4, Lowry AF8, Colorado, OTS-6, Dover AFB, Delaware, DTS 8, Glenview NAS, Illinois, and OTS 25, Bergstrom AFB, Texas. The division increased its requirement for reservists or individual mobilization augmentees (IMAs}, with the goal of eventually creating a DTS devoted to AFIS/INGA support. There were several false starts in 1984, but the division foresaw eventual benefits and was expected to continue its efforts regarding reserve support into 1985.4? CONTRACT RESEARCH ¥ bid The Special Studies Bivision continued to fund research projects through the Federal Research Division of the Library of Congress and the Arnold Engineering Bevelopment Center. At the former, the focus of study was on Soviet concepts af camouflage, concealment, and deception. At the latter, the focus was on the analysis of camouflage, concealment and deception activity at 4 classified facility in the Soviet Union,50 *CAMCON is the Air Force Oenial and Deception (formerly Camouflage, Concealment, and Deception) Gata Base.
BATA AUTOMATION SUPPORT To increase analyst efficiency, AFIS/INOA planned data and office automation initiatives for fiscal year 1985. The Automated Message Handling System (AMHS}' was planned for instaltation in 1985. The word processing inventory was increasecé, and the unit stated a requirement for desk top computers. Also during the year, the division sketched out its data automation "S-year plan” to impose coherence on its acquisition program, WEEKLY ACTIVITY REPORTS Starting 1 May 1984, the division began printing a weekly activity report as one way to inform the new division commander about the activities and projetts of division personnel, The reports were continued to establish a data base of historical information. AEROSPACE INTELLIGENCE The Aerospace Intelligence Division continued to produce and disseminate the Air Force Intelligence Daily message (AF ID) atid numerous special messages on a regular basis.> Intelligence Briefing Branch The six-mamber officer staff of the Intelligence Briefing Sranch conducted current intelligence briefings for the secretary and chief of the Air Force on behalf of the assistant peleted pet $ 0.8.0. $52(b) (1)
chief of staff, inteltigence (ACS/I}, The briefers also provided current intelligence presentations to senior Air Staff agencies, with the Air Force Surgeon General and the Air Force Directorate of Plans being added in October and December of this year, respectively. The United Kingdom and Australian Liaisons also continued to receive briefings by INOZA.5 fanning the branch twenty-four fours a day during the duty week, the briefers were responsible not only for editing and planning items to be briefed, but also for determining, procuring, and interrogating the graphic/video support that complements the script. INOZA compiled the items sent to the Senior Intelligence Officers in the major commands and special operating agencies throughout the Air Force and conducted drfefings on pertinent intelligence developments specially directed by the ACS/I. Examples of briefings requested by the ACS/I were as follows: a special briefing on European nuclear force improvement prograns for an officer bound for an assignment as assistant defense attache for the United Kingdom; a “Global Challenge" briefing for distinguished civilian visitors; a “Soviet Threat" briefing for the National Guard unit in Nashvitie, Tennessee; and, in a joint effort with AF/X0, a special briefing on Afghanistan for the chief of staff of the Air Force? Intelligence WATCH fend The Air Force Intelligence WATCH was a twenty-four hour, seven-day a week operation primarily responsible for apprising the ACS/E and the AP/IN-AFIS staff of fast-breaking intelligence events. Two notable changes in the WATCH during the year were the completion of the process to man the WATCH by an all-officer cadre and the addition of a sixth WATCH officer billet. As of December, the parnmanent six-mamber cadre consisted of four second lieutenants and two captains, aT? occupying captein billets. A tour of duty in the WATCH was approximately one year. The requirement for another “permanent WATCH officer became necessary during the summer in order to man the Air Force Liaison desk ia the National Military Intelligence Alert Center {NMIC) in the Defense Intelligence Agency, Pentagon. For a five- week period every six months, permanent WATCH officers rotated through the MMIC, The representative's responsibilities included the following: ensured designated intelligence products (cables, supplements, appraisals, summaries, and dacoms} were received by the WATCH for rapid dissemination; ensured significant messages, received hours earlier trough the NSS {NMIC Support System), were sent to analysts (AF/INER} for timely appraisal; obtained the DIA CICS briefing agenda for INE and INER; attended INC production meetings daily; and aided in processing badge requests. Buring crisis situations, the Air Force WMIC representative was able to
help monitor the situation as it unfolded in the Alert Center, thus supporting the WATCH and INER analysts with up-to-the-minute details which might otherwise have reached the WATCH hours later. With the NSS capability, messages were easily retrieved for INER analysts, and, with access to ather GIA analysts, the representative often helped in the OJA-AFIN/INER analyst interface. Finally, during their Liaison Officer tours, WATCH officers dealt with JS-I and alert center analysts, were able to tour the Collection Coordination Facility (CCF), the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS}, and the Moscow/Washington Emergency Communications Link {MOLINK) facilities, and in general, had a greater opportunity. to learn about national intelligence community operations 58 Three of the permanent WATCH officers were able to attend the Indications and Warning School - an event that was expected to be part of a trend. Also, permanent WATCH officers participated in the JCS-dfrected exercise, POWDER RIVER, for the ides 8S during the year, and participation was expected again in 1985,°° . New equipment ordered in 1983 (television, ¥CR, geackron and offer clocks} were received in 1934. Although the television was initially envisioned as a one channel system, the WATCH received authority for an expanded cable system. The system received not only CNN, but also C-Span, Pentagon Communications Channel, afl three major stations, as well as the public television station. The capability to tape news programs, and to have the tape ready immedietely thereafter, allowed the WATCH to meet short suspenses required by INOZA, and occasionally by the INE. Equipment upgrades were expected to continue into 1985. The branch was planning for its portion of the Automated Data Handling ystem. The WATCH continued to prepare datly readbooks for the Air Force chief and vice chiefs of staff, the ACS/I, DACS/I, INE, O/INE, division chiefs and analysts and to maintain Alert Officer Logs and WATCH Highlights of significant events and developments .61 Executive Intelligence Branch At 0200 hrs, staff from the new Executive Intelligence Branch (INOZE) began preparing the Air Force Intelligence Moroing Bighlights. Ready for distribution by 0700, the Morning High~ Tights provided timely reporting of intelligence events Specitically for the chief of staff of the Air Force, as well as for over sixty-three senior Air Force and interagency consumers. The majority (57) were distributed to air staff offices; the rest were sent to high-level 050/00 offices, including the deputy
48 secretary of defense. Gne copy was also sent by courier te the White Situation Room, and information from the Morning Highlights occasionally reached the President of the United States. INOZE's responsibilities also involyed the development and intenance of several in-depth, all-source, tailored intelligence briefings, These briefings included a classified presentation of “Soviet Force Modernization,” a Worldwide Crisis Activity briefing, and an Air Force Intelligence Activity briefing. Some of the briefings contained over 200 viewgraphs and lasted over an hour. They were presented in various classifications to a wide range of audiences, from civic groups to reserve forces and senior air staff officers. wa The Executive Intelligence Branch maintained its own 35am and viewgraph library, and possessed an archive of all briefings composed during the year. To handle the increased workload, a second officer billet was added, bringing the total to two. At present, INQZi was in the process of obtaining a permanent 201X0 NCO billet. Although office space was cramped, the branch was making plans to increase the amount of usable area as the scope of the branch's duties and responsibilities continued to expand.04 IN0Z Administration The administration for IN0Z continued to support various branch duties, as well as provide personne? support for the entire division. Primarily responsible for requirements originated by the Briefing Branch, INOZ Administration assisted in the following: 1) prepared scripts for the daily intelligence briefings, 2) readied briefings and accompanying visual support for mailing to other agencies and comands, 3) ensured copies of the AFID and AFA messages were sent to designated recipients, 43 provided assistance in completing messages that had to be specially handled for the ACS/I and chief of staff of the Atr Force when they were on TRY; and 5) provided projectionist support for briefings. INOZ Administration also assisted division personne} in processing forms for changes in rank or AFSC, as well as obtaining leave authorization numbers for members taking time off. The Administration unit also maintained a library of over 100 volumes 65 AUDIOVISUAL PRESENTATIONS The Audiovisual Presentations Division was responsitte for providing the audiovisual expertise to create, modify, and maintain graphic displays for the purpose of informing appropriate audiences on intelligence matters. The division served as the agency representative in inter-departmental audiovisual matters and provided support for intelligence related pragrams at required.
At the end of the year there were seven civilians and seven enlisted personne! working in the division. Presentation Support @ During 1984, the division supported not only AF/IN, AFIS and AC, but other agencies such as the Electronic Security Command, the Air War College, Air University, and the 12th AF/SSO in Bergstrom, Texas. The support was in the form of yiewgraphs (visual gids), 8X10 inch color Ektachrome transparencies, and 35am slides. During 1984,  INOV's production exceeded 12,000 — presentation aids. To produce this quantity over 45,000 units of work were accomplished. The division also completed over 750 work requests. Key representative presentation efforts, other than for daily Current Intelligence 8riefings, included CANUKUS, SOS, Air Staff Grientation, Global Challenge, Senior Statesmen, and the Presidential Foreign Intelligence Board.& In March 1964, Mr. Caldwell and Mr. Heittman attended the Senior Intelligence Officer's Conference. held at Homestead AF3, Florida. Their job was to support the conference with audiovisue] aids and to produce graphics for the Current Intelligence Sriefing, presented at 0700 hrs daily. Photographic Support ea The division’s photo production for 1984 was the highest in many years, with over 25,000 35mm color slides produced, 4 smatl portion of which was in direct support of other commands. In August 1984, INGV assumed = additiona? photographic responsibilities to support AF/IN, AFIS, and AFSAC on awards ceremonies and special photographic sessions in support of The Intelligencer newspaper.” Working Space Concerns The division's main concern was with working space. According to INOVY personnel; “Inadequate space creates both safety and security hazards for the working staff. Example: Both the Pentagon and Ft. Belvoir Photo tabs must be ‘increased to provide room for critical equipment. If additional space was avatlable, INOV could combine at} three branches, leading to better production management and contro} over resources.”
DIRECTORATE OF TARGETS MISSION ea The Directorate of Target Intelligence (AFIS/INT} was the Air force office of primary responsibility for target intelligence to include weaponeering, target analysis, force application and mission planning, target materiat, and mapping, charting and geodesy. The directorate wag the Air Force's point of contact with the Defense Mapping Agency. Soma of the functions of the Concepts and Applications Division (INTA} were the following: Developed, recommended, and coordinated plans, polictes, and positions on Air Staff and Joint Chief of Staff actions that related to target intelligence. Collaborated with Air Force research, development, testing, and evatuation community on applying target technologies, methodologies, and capabilities to advanced weapon systems, Maintained liaison with and conducted periodic visits to major commands, special operating agencies, and other military services and Department of Defense agencies on matters related to target intelligence, target materials, and weaponeer ing. od Served as the office of collateral responsibility for € targeting career fields. Reviewed and monitored utilization, classification, and training of U.S. Air Force active duty and reserve personne! in these career fields, Some of the functions of the Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy Division were the following:3 Developed, recommended, reviewed, and coordinated on plans, programs, and policies of the Afr Staff, Joint Staff, Unified and Specified Commands, and Defense Agencies relating to Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy (MC&G). Collaborated with the Air Force research, development, testing, and evaluation community on applying MCBG techniques, methodologies, and capabilities to advanced weapon systems, Acted as the Air Force authority for validating and monitoring MC&G and geophysical data requirements submitted
to major commands (other than U.S. commands} and special operating agencies. a As functional manager, monitored Air Force officer and enlisted cartographic and geodetic career fields. PERSONNEL Key Personne} = Lt. Col. Phillip D. Wilder was the acting director of the from 1 September 1963 until 5 September 1984, when he was reassigned to the ADUSO{1), Pentagon. Colonel Thomas E, Lee was appointed the new director, effective 24 August 1984. Colonel Lee officiatly replaced Colone? dohn S. McKenney, the director, who retired from the Air force on i October 1983. Colonel Lee had been the chief of Targets, Intelligence Center Pacific, U.S. Pacific Command, from 1979 to 1984. Lt. Col. Charles Rose continued as the chief of the Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy Uivision, while Lt. Col. Thomas E, Vincent continued as chief of the Concepts and Applications Division.4 Manning Strength GB 4s of 31 December 1984 the manning strength of the directorate was as followss” AUTHORIZEO ASSIGNED PERCENT OFFICERS 13 3 100% ENLISTED 3 3 100% CIVILIANS ms 6 100% TOTAL 22 22 100% FARGETING MATTERS Conferences and Meetings Buring the year, the Girectorate of Targets hosted the USAF Target Intelligence Conference and conducted the winter meeting of the Joint Munitions Effectiveness Menual (Air te Surface} Gperational Users Working Group, USAF Target Intelligence Conference The Directorate of Targets hosted the third USAF Target Intelligence Conference at Headquarters, £lectronic Security Command, Kelly AFB, Texas, from 6-10 February 1984. Conferees included sixty-one representatives from twenty-six different
elements of the worldwide targeting community. Within the overall theme of "Oynamics in Targeting,“ the conference served a twofold purpose: 1} served as a forum for discussion of the current Status and future development of targeting theory and practices, and 2} served as an educational process through which senior targeteers could be brought up-to-date on matters affecting their professfon.6 Among the topics discussed were the following: “Law of Armed Conflict,” “The Threat from Space," “Strategic Defense Initiatives," “Unconventional Warfare," “Defense Nuclear Agency Targeting Support,” "Target Analysis Decision Aids," “SIOP Target Development Process," “Perishable Targets,” "Relocatable Targets," "Cruise Missile Targeting," “Naval Mine Warfare," “C3CM Data Bases,” “Rirland Battle,” "Camouf tage, Concealment, and Deception,” "Soft Copy MC&G," and “Manpower Issues."/ Tne INT directorate published the proceedings of the conference, which included summaries of presentations and discussions, such as the following:& Law of Armed Conflict it. Col, Gonald Woods, International Law Diviston, Office of the Judge Advocate General, discussed targeting implications of the Law of Armed Conflict. Of particular interest was the 1977 additional protocols to the General Convention. These protocols dealt with the general protection of the civilian population against effects of hostilities. Specific provisions impacting on targeteers were restrictions on targeting civilian populations, and cultural objects and long term effects on the national environment, Also discussed was the Services/3CS position on the ratification of Protocol Jil for the 1982 Conventional Weapons Convention which deals with the employment of incendiary weapons, BISCUSSION: The follow-on discussion centered on the’ non-applicability of the protocols to nuclear weapons; ability to determine the presence of civilians in the area of attack; and the position of allies on the protocols. Lt. Col, Woods provided the conferees with handouts which expanded on the protocols discussed. Unconventional Warfare tt. Col, Greg Jannarone, 2 AD/XP, presented a comprenensive, in-depth briefing on unconventional
warfare. Lt. Col. Jannarone defined the Special Operations targeting cycle; addressed the optimum role of Special Operations Forces - deterrence; discussed operational philosophy - force multiplication; and described employment payoffs - disruption, diversion, delay. In addition, it. Col. dJannarone provided a detailed description of current Air Force Special Operations Forces capabilities/limitations and the probability/risk of employing these forces over the spectrum of conflict. DISCUSSION: A lively discussion ensued focusing upon the role of the targeteer in unconventional warfare; requirements for targeting billets; and formal courses designed to enhance the targeteer’s knowledge of Un. Cruise Missile Targeting in response to requests from several commands for information on cruise missile targeting, of iPAC addressed the conference on the Ur targeting effort for the Tomahawk cruise missile, discussed Tomahawk characteristics, capabilities, ang limitations which affect the targeting process. He highlighted the extensive date base requirements for eruise missiles and the need for specialized intelligence products te support target/mission planning. Tre briefing reviewed in detail the PACOM target selection process for cruise missiles, mission planning guidelines, and targeting constraints which arise from a variety of sources, further presented generic target lists for various types of cruise missiles and outlined some projected improvements in the Tomahawk missile system which were expected to significantly enhance its capabilities. ty There were five conference action items:& 1. Examine the requirements in Air Force Raguta- tion 36-1 for entry into the targeting career field to include grade and AFSC criteria. 2. Examine the possibility of acquiring reserve targets officers to help filt active duty forces shortfalls. 3. Examine the need for establishing a library for targeting applications software, Deleted pet 5 U.S.C. $52(b) (6)
4. Identify targeting decision aids under develap- ment or in being. 5. Address the deficiencies in identifying digital geographic information requirements to support the targeting mission of the Air Farce. The keynote speaker at the conference was the ACS/I, Maj. Gen, James C. Pfautz. Also, Brig, Gen. C. Norman Wood, the deputy director for the National Strategic Target List, doint Strategic Target Planning Staff, presented the conference dinner remarks, while the closing speaker was Maj. Gen. John 8. Marks, the comzander of the Electronic Security Command. The proceedings summarized the presentation of each speaker 10 OMEM Operational Users Working Group Meeting As the office of primary responsibility for the Joint Munitions &ffectiveness Manual Air-to-Surface Uperational Users Working Group {OUWG) the INT directorate conducted the winter meeting, held 14-16 November at the Naval Air Station, Fallon, Nevada. Gr vuring the meeting, six action items were agreed upon: 1. The- OUWG chairman was to arrange for a representative of the Chemical Working Group to brief progress on chemical weaponeering methodologies and follow-on plans for functional degradation analyses at the next OUWG meeting, Poloted per 5 U.5.0. 552(){ F }
3. The OUNG was to survey members to determine if a need existed for risk estimates data for attacks conducted perpendicular to friendly troop positions. Current risk data assumed a paralle? attack.14 4, The OUWG chairman was to request that OIA provide an upgate on its blue-on-blue effort for the next QUWG meeting. 15 5. The Basic Manual Group was requested to evaluate the following suggestions and provide feedback to the OUNG: a. Given the current widespread use of low level tactics, it is desirable that the trajectory and pattern graphs . be expanded somewhat to cover releases down to 200 feet. b. The caution provided with Figure A-1¥-1 should be rewritten to indicate that individual weapons have release restrictions which may meke it impossible to use the full range of aircraft intervalometer settings; aircraft, flight manuats should be consulted for specific information. 6. The Basic Manual Group and Methodology Working Group were requested to evaluate the following recommendation and provide feedback to the OunG.18 The methodology for evaluating guns and rockets against area targets calls for use of modified Basic Manual open end method 3. Use of 100 foot stick Tength appears questionable for ripple rocket firing. For strafing attacks, strafing length is required input; no formula for calculating the distance is provided. The current methodology merits review and confirmation of its validity. Provision of @ suitable sample area target problem should be examined. 7, The OUWG chairman was requested to draft an appropriate sample problem (ig connection with Action Item 6) for inclusion in the Basic Manual. Publications Regulations AFR 209-16
Following the upgrade of the Targets Division to directorate status, the ACS/] tasked the INT directorate to prepare an Air Force regulation for targeting. INT's charter was to write the regulation to help solidify INT's role as the Air Staff executive agent for targeting matters, functiona) manager for 8085/201X1 career fields, and systems monitor for weapons and intelligence systems impacting on targeting. Also, the regulation was to outline the relationships between AFIS/INT and Air Force targeting elements worldwide. After a lengthy review and coordination process, the regulation was finally made official on 16 November 1984 as AFR 200-16, “Air Force Targeting.” The regulation was UNCLASSIFIED. Policy for Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy (NcaG) requirements that supported targeting were defined in AFR 96-9,2 AFP 200-31, Volume } aS In 1985 the Air Force and Army agreed to use two separate documents to analyze nuclear weapons effects against fixed and mobile targets. AP-550, “DIA Physical Vulnerability Kandbook-huclear Weapons," was to be used to weaponeer and determine safe distances for fixed/installation targets, and FM 101-31-Z, “Staff Officers’ Field Manual Nuclear Weapons Employment Effects Data" was selected to analyze land mobile/battlefield targets. As a result, in 1981 the Air Force adopted FM 101-31-2 and gave it an additional short title <-~ AEP 200-31 Yo! Ii, but “did not adopt FM 101-312. FM i01-31-1 explained how to use FM 10}-31-2 and outlined Army doctrine as it retated to the planning and employment of nuclear weapons in combat operations at the corps, division, and brigade level, The Air Force did not adopt Fm 10l- 3i-1 in conjunction with FM 101-31-2, because the former was called a “doctrinal* publication. The Air Force {AF /XOXID and AFIS/INT} determined that tne manual did not contain “doctrine” as defined in JCS terms. The Air Force considered the document as procedural guidance rather than as a dactrinal publication. Also, the manual was written from an Army perspective (ground command) and was not easily used by an Air Force planner, @ AFIS/INT, in a joint effort with the US Army Nuclear and Chemical Agency and the WAVY OPR, revised FM 101-31-1 to reflect the air, land, and naval perspective on planning and employment of nuclear weapons against jand mobile/battlefield targets. However, the Army retained the word “doctrine” in the title and referred to the text as Army doctrine. Nonetheless, the adoption of this document was ancther positive step in the development of jofnt planning tools. Although staffing was completed in 1984, FM 101-31-1, was expected to be published in February 1985 as AFP 200-31, Yotume I,
Technical Notes In October 1984, the INT directorate sterted publishing Technical Notes, which were simple reports, unofficial but authoritative and signed by authors, for the dissemination of information on subjects pertinent to targeting. Technical Notes (TNs} were assigned sumbers, corresponding to the year of preparation, followed by a serial number. A listing of INT Technical Notes for 1984 follows:2¢ CLASSIFI-~ nO. DATE SUBJECT AUTHOR CATION 84~01 12 Get 84 Nuclear Weaponeering (U} Mr. Vogt S/RO 84-02 S Nov 84 Air Force Contingency Targeting Support Cell (v) Major Lecklider U 84-03 23 Gct 84 Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy Manpower Recommendations (U} Major Cavey u 84-04 19 Nov 84 USSR Target Hard- ness (U} Captain Eliasson C 84-05 20 vec 84 Red-on-Blue Nuclear seaponeerinag (U} Mr. Vogt TS Target Director's Update During the year, the directorate continued to print and disseminate the unofficial newsletter “Target Director's Update,“ which was first published on 27 December 1983. The purpose of the newsletter was to inform the targeting community of current issues, articles, publications, and items of interest. Some of the subjects reported on in the three issues prepared in March, dune, and September 1984 were as follows: Geodetic and Geophysics Conference, Joint Line Fire Test Program, Senior Officers’ introduction to Targeting Symposium, Professional Reading - Unconventional Warfare, Creek Press - A USAFE Targeting Initiative, Functional Intelligence Augmentation Team, Nuclear wWeaponeering Software, AMRAAM - Live Fire Tests, Infrared Mavgrick Developments, and ULCHE FOCUS LENS - An Air Staff Perspective. Hard Target Munitions Project Fed Deleted per 5 U.S.C. 392 (b}
Significant TOYs While the Directorate of Targets sent representatives to numerous conferences and meetings throughout the year, two significant trips were made to the Pacific and European theaters. European Theater From 25 dune - 9 July, Mr. Constantine N. Pappas and Capt. Laurie S$. Eliasson visited sites in the United Kingdom and ~ = = ~ # 2 ni mn ” 2 a * 4 * e wt i w & 3 a os ‘oO a Deleted per 5 U.8.¢, 352¢b} (1)
the Federal Republic of Germany. The purpose of the visit was to discuss targeting and mapping, charting, and geodesy (MC&G} issues with theater personnel and to provide INT personne! with a continue: familiarization with theater targeting and MC&G issues.2 The two INT representatives also discussed one major initiative, CREEK PRESS, which was USAFE‘s effort to provide in- depth target intelligence in support of sophisticated weapon systems and precfsely-quided munitions, such as the F-l11 with the PAVE TACK navigation System, The INT directorate was going to continue to provide support to USAFE/INE in this area. Pacific Theater ’ From $1? August 1984, Lt. Col. Thomas £. Vincent and SMSgt David Lb. Simpson visited the Pacific Theater. Cotonel Thomas E. Lee, the incoming INT director, joined them for the Japan and Korea portion of the trip. The purpose of the visit was to receive an orientation on the targeting perspective and function for the Pacific Theater, to discuss significant theater targeting issues, and to contact officer and enlisted targeting personnel, representing INT as the fypctional oniter of the targeting career fields, 8085 and 201X1, Deleted per 5 0.5.0. 552(b} {1} Deleted per 5 U.s.c. 352(b) (1)
aS At 2833 stops, it. Col. Vincent and SMSgt Simpson _ individually interviewed atl assigned and available officers and enlisted personne? in the 8085 and 201X1 career fields. A total of thirty 8085s and fifteen Z01X1s were counselled, which included career counseling, training, and personnel assignment desires.3° Requested Weapons Target List Officers Position Description Book Nelered per 3 U.S.C. $$2(b} (1) Dolnted nen RI. MRAP} (Q ) Deleted pex 5 H.S.C. 952(b)(1)
MAPPING, CHARTING, AND GEODESY . During the year, the Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy Biviston (INTB) sponsored two conferences, one held at Bolling AFB and one at St. Louis, Missouri. fopferences and Meetings Sponsored First MC&6 Conference The Kapp ing, Charting, and Geodesy (MC&G} Bivistoa of the Tectorate of Targets hosted and sponsored the first Air Force MCRG Conference, 18-19 October 1964, at Gotling AFB. Conference attendees were Air Force MC&G managers and Air Force survey personnel. Attendees identified, discussed, and shared thefr common problems and concerns and developed action items to -address them. Topical items addressed included mapping and charting issues; policy, plans, and requirements; and Air Force MC&G personnel matters. The chief of the MC&G Division, Lt. Col. Charles M. Rose, welcomed the attendees and presented the opening reinacks. @B 2 1245 Conference Action Stems were as follows: Mapping and Charting?? 1. AFIS/INTE was to request that the Defense Mapping Agency (OMA) graphically represent special products in the Grey Book and in the DMA catalogues as was currently done for standard products. BD 2. AFIS/INTS was to request that DMA further define the area requirements procedures for research and development {R&D) requirements. The submission process for current annuat area requirements was an identification of 4 midrange time frame (three to eight years} and did nat allow for R&O requirements which were usually less than three years. MD 3. AFIS/INTS was to discern the benefits of the National High Altitude Program and procedures for requests to the U.S. Geological Survey. Deleted par 5 U.S.C. SS2(d) (2 }
Geodetic and Geophysical4? l. Attendees were to keep each other apprised of Air Force and/or OMA activities that affected each other. 2. USAFE and AFIS/INT were to propose efforts to equip and train the 60lst Tactical Control Wing. 3. AFIS/INT was to provide USAFE with requisite data @xcerpted from the Navigational Aid/Inertial Navigation System (NAVAIO/INS} study. 4, AFIS/INT was to investigate and insure that the Geodetic and Geophysical Support Autometed Listing reflected the timely and correct status of surveys and other geodetic and geophysical information. Policy, Plans, and Requirements4! QD arisstnt2 was to delete the unclear paragraph on ordering and stocking maps in AFR 96-3, the next time the regulation was updated, Digital Cartographic Datat? i. AFIS/INTB was to arrange for a technical indactrination visit for Air Force MC&G command points of contact ta the Environmental Research Institute of Michigan at Ann Arbor, Michigan. 2. AFIS/INTB was te determine the mechanics for establishing 2 “clearinghouse* for micro-computer software application programs for the use of digital geographic data by the Air Force. AF G&G Conference ¥ ’ The fifth Air Force Geodetic and Geophysical {68%} Conference was sponsored by AFIS/INTB and hosted by the Defense Mapping Agezcy Aerospace Center, St, Louis, Missouri, 6-8 March 1984. “Conference attendees included Air Force mapping, charting, and geodetic staff officers; Air Force and civilian project managers; action officers in G&G related projects; Air Force survey personne?; and Qefense Mapping Agency personnel. The conference examined present and future weapon systems required to carry out the Air Force mission and addressed the related geodetic and geophysical concerns.44 GHP the following were the recommended action items:44
> a. Air Force will propose new G&G technical objectives for advanced weapon systems. (Action: AFIS) = b. Air Force commanders with survey resources and will develop understanding and/or agreement on itech of survey resources. (Action: OMA, SAC, AFIS, AFC @ ¢. 6&6 principals will investigate the use of Miniature Interferometer Terminal for Earth Surveying {MITES} positioning capability in support of future positioning requirements for advanced space-based weapon systems. (Action: AFIS, AFSC, AFGL, ON4, et al) QB 4. Air Force will schedule meeting to discuss AF 222XX concerns. (Action: AFIS, SAC, AFCC, DHA} e, Air Force will reassess survey requirements staffing process, streamline, and close Joop. (Action: AFIS) AF Command Representatives} f. Air Force will continue sionitoring the implementation of the World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS- 84) and its impact on Air Force operations, (Action: AFIS, AF commands} . g. Affected parties will have technical interchange meetings to discuss Military Grid Reference System designation problems and viable alternatives. (Action: AFIS, TAC, OMA) nh. OMA will augment existing data bases with geodertc data for selected airfields to satisfy TAC requirement, {Action: AFIS, TAC, DMA} SAR SK Definition Meeting Ps On 6-7 September 1984, the Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy Division convened 2 meeting to establish guidelines for the conduct of a requirements definition study for the determination of the digital data required to support simulation of current technology synthetic  aperature radar (SARs). Representatives from the Aeronautical Systems Division of Air Force Systems Command, Tactical Air Command, Strategic Air Command, and the Gefense Mapping Agency attended. In October, in accordance with AFR 96-9, the INT directorate tasked the Air Force Systems Command to initiate a study of Air Force SAR simulation digital data requirements. The AFSC study was to be submitted to INT by 1 May 1985.45
Membership on Conmittees and Working Groups OSU Digital MC&S Transformation W6 As a member of the OSD Digital MCAG Transformation working Group, the INTB representatives were involved with the issue of the Defense Mapping Agency's “transformation” of DMA standard data to satisfy the unique requirements of weapon systems and training devices. The number of programs requiring transformations had grown from two to nine, six of which were Air Force systems. System contractors developed transformation programs without OMA input. The contractors then turned the programs over to DMA, which absorbed a1] further computer time and labor costs, OMA's position was that if could mot continue to transform data to individual requirements because of manpower and hardware imitations. As of October 1984, the conclusion of the INTS representatives was as follows: “Air Force stated position is AF should not accept responsibility for basic transformation of DMA data." By year's end, the transformation problem was not yet resolved.46 Working Party 64 The Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy Division was tasked to coordinate with other Services and provide a U.S. National Statement on the recommendations made .in the Management Committee's review of ‘the report of the 27th meeting of Working Party 64 Aeronautical Charts and Flight Information Publications. Tne division accomplished the tasking in 1984, and the contents of the report of the meeting were accepted. Working Party 64 was, a subcommittee of the Air Standardization Coordination Committee. C&G Area Requirements Each year the INTB division prepared a report on Air Force requirements for MC&G products, jdentified on the basis of operational area, priority, and program objective memorandum (POM) cycle. The requirements represented a consolidation of operational requirements submitted by major commands and separate operating agencies and were restricted to essential products for the Air Force mission, Submitted for CY1984 were 1) MC&G requirements for USAF-consolidsted, HQ USAF, HQ TAC, HQ AAC, HQ AFSC, 2) updated Geodetic and Geophysical Support Automated Listing {GGSAL), 3) projected requirements, and 4) detailed requirements. Support for Weapons Systems a The Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy Division and the INT 65
66 directorate were involved with supporting three major weapons systems during the year, 8-18, F+i5, and F-16. 8-18 Program During the year, the INTB division coordinated with the Defense Mapping Agency (DMA) on data base support for the 8-18 and the B-18 Weapon Systems Trainer (WST}. In January, INT sent the OMA a summary of the stated requirements for the 8-18 WST and outlined INT's understanding of the support to be provided by. OMA. The two types of OMA support included: 1) timely production of source data and 2} transformation of the data to produce ¢@ simulator data base. Source data was to be provided for yisua? and conventional radar and for high resolution radar modes. Transformation support by OMA consisted of the OMA‘'s Aerospace Center operating the 8-18 Digital Radar Land Mass Simulator {ORLMS) transformation program and OMA accepting a stand-alone computer system ta be dedicated te 8-18 simulator dats base transformat fon. In February, representatives from the INT directorate, Befense Mapping Agency, Strategic Air Command, Aeronautical Systems Division, and Rome Air Development Center met and were briefed that DKA cavid not meet delivery dates for requirements identified in March 1983. The products reqhired were to include 135 1° x 10 cells of. digital feature analysis data and 50 high resolution synthetic aperature radar aimpoint areas. Belays up to one year were expected. According to Lt. Col. Wilder, the acting director of INT, the delays were not acceptable to the Air Force, because they could potentially affect the 8-1B KST contracts. At the end of this reporting period, the OMA was still predicting delays 00 In danuary, the INT directorate also validated mapping and charting support to assist the @-18 Specia} Program Office and the Combined Test force at Edwards AFB,*California, in the testing of the 8-18 and its avionics systems. The data requirements were sent te the DNA,SL F~26 Gigital Cartographic Support In October, the INTB division reviewed and validated an Air Force Systems Command requirement for digital cartographic support for the F-16 Improved Oigital Radar Landmass Simulation System. The requirement was forwarded to the Defense Mapping Agency, using terminology learned from the 8-18 requirements submission package, 0%
F+15& WST Gigital Cartegraphic Support in November, Colonel (ee, the new AFIS/INT director, sent fo the OMA the AFSC's validated requirements for digital cartographic support for the prototype F-15E Weapon System Trainer (wST), The purpose of the F-15f WST was to provide high fidelity mission rehearsal training toe both the pilot and weapon system operator. Requirement included the simulation of high resolution, synthetic aperature radar (SAR} and infrared (IR) sensors and preplanned missions through a real world gating area of approximately 160,000 square nautical miles.53 Mr. Nei} Sunderland, who worked with AFSC repre- sentatives on the F-15E project, noted that AFSC's Aeronautical Systems Oivision planned to have the contractor for the WST responsible for data base construction and transformation. £&& Requirements Support The Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy Division worked with the AFIS Directorate of deint Services Support (INU) in support of two major projects, the production of a map for Exercise RIDGE RUNNER and the validation of evasion and escape (€8E) requirements for transmittal to the Defense Mapping Agency.* Map for Exercise RIDGE RUNNER ‘ @ During the AFIS/INU's evasion and escape Exercise RIDGE RUNNER, 20 August - 4 September 1984, participants used a map produced by the 30th Engineer Battalion and validated by INTs, The map was of the exercise area, Camp Dawson, West Virginia, and made of a water resistant material called Tyvek. The map also contained information about and pictures of edible and poisonous plants of the area.95 E&E Requirements Dilenne e In April, at the Air Force Mapping, Charting, and Geodetic Conference, a briefing explained the problems associated with the production of evasion and escape charts (£V¥Cs). in summary, the Air Force had a requirement for expanded EVE coverage to the Defense Mapping Agency (OMA) for over ten years. The OMA, however, since 1975 held in abeyance al} EVC production, pending *For additional information on the RIDGE RUNNER map, see the section in this History on AFIS/INU. 6/
oo the production of a miniaturized chart viewing device (CVD). The CVD was intended to replace evasion charts in aircraft where storage of numerous bulky charts was prohibitive, and the OM was to produce filmstrips for the CVO. The Air Force Systems Command was to produce the device, but it placed the production in low priority status. Thus, a dilemma surrounded EAE chart production. The DMA would not produce new escape and evasion charts because they were to be replaced by the fiimstrips and chart viewing device. The Systems Command, however, was not to produce the chart viewing device in the near Future.d6 The AFIS Directorate of Joint Services Support was working with the INT directorate in finding solutions to the dilemma. The INU directorate was the Department of Defense office of primary responsibility for escape and evasion and was consolidating 000 requirements for charts and viewing devices and assisting with sorting out Air Forge roles and policy on EVC and cvu for the Defense Mapping Agency. Functional Management Inspection Deleted per $ 0,$.C. 552(b) (5)
(D(Mesg +o “SA 23d paroreg (S)(MZEs “O's"a ¢ aad pazayag “9°g"h $ aad pazetad {5} (@) ESS
70 At the end of this reporting period, ‘the Targets directorate was working to implement recommended changes and was expected to continue doing so throughout the following year. MC&G Personnel and Training Issues Throughout the year, the MCLG division examined career, assignment, and training issues affecting mapping, charting, and geadesy personnel, MCEG Manpower Recommendations An offshoot of the functional management inspection {FMI} was INT8's MCEG inanpower recommendations, published as ene of the Tachnical Notes in Gctober 1984. Maj. Stewart R. Davey prepared the recommendations. The Fill had concluded that MC&G staff functions were not being adequately accomplished and that MCZG expertise was not properly being incorporated into systems development, operational pianning, and logistics, because of, in part, insuffictent manpower, visibility, and rank within the MC&G function, Sinca specific manpower recommendations were not included in the functional management inspection report, it wes necessary for INTB to make such recommendations. In summation, INTB recommended the establishment of twenty-eight positions for thirteen organizations. There were then only seven positions in existence, and of these, five were recommended for conversion from AFSC $734 to AFSC 5716.55 2 Occupational Survey Report In January 1984, the USAF Occupational Measurement Center of the Air Training Command issued an occupational survey report of the Cartographic and Geodetic Officer Utilization Field {AFS 57XX} and the enlisted Geodetic Surveyor Career Ladder (AFS 222X0}. The AFIS MC&G division had originally requested the survey in 1982, through the Directorate of Estimates 66 Information during the survey wes collected from 64 cartographic and geodetic officers, representing 91 percent of the assigned strength and from 87 geodetis specialists, representing 85 percent of their assigned strength.® S € é s al ral 8 4 J a . e g + % & 5 3 a
@ A summary of survey results follows :68 1. dob Structure: Analysis — of the job structure of the AFS 5/XX and AFSC 222X0 fields identified seven job groups. The jobs were categorized jnto plans and requirements, contract monitoring, management, training, surveying, and data preparation. The officer jobs reflect substantial variety, while the majority of enlisted personnel performed as geodetic surveyors. GMB 2. Classification Sescriptions: A comparison ef tasks performed with the «} {For officers} and AFR 39-1 (fer enlisted personnel) Specialty Descriptions revealed reasonably accurate summaries of the jobs actually performed. 3. Training Assessment: Comparison of job and task data with plans of instruction indicated substantial portions of the officer course in need of considerable review, while the enlisted course generally appeared appropriate for the jobs graduates performed, 4. Implications: Management intervention, in terms of additional authorizations, AF assignments, and additional education, appears necessaty to build a utilization field sustaining force for the Cartographic and Geodetic Officers. Additionally, management should explore alternatives to the personal hardship resulting from extensive TOY requirements for many MC&G officer and, particularly, enlisted personnel. Education and Training Requirements Conference As a result of the occupational measurement survey, the MC&G division convened a conference on 10-11 duly “1984 to establish educBtion and training requirements for the 57XX and 222X0 personnel. Twenty- five persons attended, from seventeen organizations. 9 The action items from the conference were a5 follows :70 1, AFIS/INT was to prepare 2 detailed proposal for Basic Cartographic Geodetic Program under AFIT to provide new officers with a common foundation of relevant courses. The proposal was to inclide advantages and costs and was to be sent to S?7XX using erganizations for comment. fd
2. AFIS/INT was to gather information from universities and AFIT to determine the feasibility of designing a core curriculum for a combined cartographic geodetic masters degree tailored to Air Force needs. 3, AFIS/INT was to investigate the possibility of establishing an “education with industry* (EWI) program in subject area(s) applicable to Air Force gartographic geodetic requirements. 4, Aetion addressees were to review suggested subjects for a single, introductory, AFSC granting training course taken by afl 5731 officers. Reviewers were to add to or delete from the subjects list and indicate knowledge levels required in each subject. AFIS/INT was to consolidate the Air Force position, negotiate significant disagreements, and provide the Air Farce WCBOC training requirements to the Defense Mapping Scnogl. 5. AFIS/INT was to assemble a list of potential short courses applicable to various MC&G positions and forward them to organizations with 97XXx personne] for review and validation, 6. AFIS/INT was to distribute’ the schedule of instruction for the Intermediate and Advanced Geodetic Surveying courses to five specified organizations for their review and then was to consolidate them for forwarding to the Defense Mapping School. Requirements for MC&G Officers Course Subsequent to the Education and Training Requirements Conference, the Mc&G division assembled the initial course for Air Force MCkG officers, consisting of a cbnmon track with the other military service's followed by a specialized Air Force track, On 10 September 1984, the division sent the course requirements to the Defense Mapping School. Subjects ta be covered in the specialized track included geodesy; photogrammetry, digital data; automated cartography applications; systems development impact an MC&G production; strategic and contingency planning; sensor exploitation and crisis support; p00, OMA, and AF policies on MCRG; AF organizational structure and interface with OMA; AF planning documents; AF MCAG requirements process; AF weapons systems, INSs, mission planning, targeting, and battlefield management systems.?
Proposed EWI Program Another result of the Education and Training Requirement Conference was INTB‘s proposal to AF/MPPE for allowing cartogra- phic geodetic officers {AFSC 57XX}, at the rate of about one per year, to train with industrial firms which used advanced state-of- the-art technology related to MCBG.72 In justification of the proposal, INTS stated the following: Advances jin computer technology are allowing the manipulation and display of targe quantities of digital data. In particular, the capacity exists to work with data derived from aerial photography and cartographic sources to produce simulated displays representing areas of the earth. This ability will satisfy the visual and radar display requirements of aircraft simulators, automated mission planning systems, battlefield management systems, and the production of spe ialized target materials for autonomous homing weap. i aad special operations. The technology is changing rapidiy, with much of the improvement in techniques and capability being developed in industrial plants. An Education With Industry Program in this subject area will help the Atr Force keep abreast of the state-of- the-art gad enhance the competence of participating officers./9 ‘ The Air Force Directorate of Personnel Programs was unable to implement INT’s proposal for fiscal year 1985, because €W1 program quotas were already filled. The directorate did inform INT, however, that its proposal may be implemented for fiscal year 1986.? Review of Plans for Training New dunior Officers On 13 November, Major Davey visited the Defense Mapping Agency Aerospace Center (DMAAC) in St. Louis, Missouri, to review OMAAC plans for training and developing newly assigned junior officers. During the 1984 000 NC&G Conference executive session, questions had arisen concerning the desired qualifications and experiences expected from the numerous junior officers {approximately 106 percent of the 57XX career field} at the conclusion of their first tour at DMAAC. Major Davey met with DMAAC representatives to ensure that OMACC's program for handling the junior officers would prepare them for subsequent assignment and be workable and productive for OMAAC and the officers themselves.72 Attracting AFROTC Students to AFSC 57Xx% @ In November, Major Davey made another trip in connection fo
with personnel matters to HQ AFROTC, Maxwell AFB, Alabama. His purpose was to learn how INTB could attract and access appropriate college students to the cartographic geodetic career field through AFROTC. He reported, “We are welcome to contact selected AFROTC detachments for the purpose of recruiting cadets with desired academic qualifications. AFROTC recruiting operations will distribute a brochure on the Cartographic Seodet ic Career Field to all detachments if we provide the master, . . .“76 As part of the same trip, Major Oavey also visited USAFMPC, Randolph AFB, attending Brigadier General Goodrich during priefings and meetings with AFMPC officials ang coordinating S7XX personnel rotation plans with Palace Sentinel./?
75 CHAPTER I1f INTELLIGENCE EDUCATION AND TRAINING DIRECTORATE OF JOINT SERVICES SUPPORT DIRECTORATE OF SOVIET AFFAIRS DIRECTORATE OF ATTACHE AFFAIRS
GIRECTORATE OF JOINT SERVICES SUPPORT MISSION The Directorate of Joint Services Support {AFIS/INU} was the responsible Air Force activity for intelligence aspects of the Vepartment of Defense Combat Survival Program, including analysis and production of intelifgence information related to U.S. prisoners of war and detained personnet?. It was responsible for al} operational aspects of Air Force participation in resistance training programs, including guidance and coordination with all branches of the armed forces. Tt produced worldwide combat Survival intelligance contingency guides and served as the executive agent's action for the Department of Gefense code of conduct training prograz. it represented the Air Force on joint services and interagency committees and working groups which dealt with combat survival and prisoner of war policies and issues. It also provided hostage survival training to selected Afr Force personne] and was responsible for ai] Oepartment of _ Defense historian and librarian functions for the code of conduct. ORGANI 2ZaTiUs Tne directorate continued to be organized into two divistons; Code of Conduct {INUA) and Defense Support Programs CINUB). The former was divided to three branches: Training {INUAA}, Production {IRUAZ}, and Library Archives (INUAC}. The latter division was also divided into three branches: Combined Support (INuBA), &Antiterrorism (INUBB), and Technical Support (THUR) 2 PERSOAKEL Key Personnal @ Lol. Ronald J. webb continued as the director of the Joint Services Support Directorate. it. Col. Larry L. Ledbetter was the chief of the Code of Conduct Division, and Maj. Robert &. Dussauit was the chief of the Defense Support Programs Division. CMSgt Richard £. Shear was the chief of Administration until his retirement in March 1984, SMSqt Wendell Newson assumed responsi- bilities as chief of administration in April 1986. Mr. Claude Watk igs, the special assistant to the director, retired in August 1984, Manning Strenath in December 1984, the directorate was manned at the following levets:4 as
73 AUTAORIZED ASSIGNED PERCENT OFFICERS 7 ? 100% ENLISTED 5 5 100% CIVILIANS 10 3 BOR TOTAL 22 20 91% TRAINING Debriefing of Lt, Goodman {USN & On 17 January, Maj. Robert Oussault and Mr. John Mitchell participated in the debriefing of U.S. Navy Ut. Robert 0. Goodman. kt. Goodman was a naval flight officer, A-6 bombadier/navigator, flying a combat mission over Lebanon on 4 December 1983, when he was shot down, captured, and transported to DAMASCUS, Syria. He was interrogated for two days and incarcerated until his release on 3 January 1984.9 On 22 August, Mr. Mitchell, the chief of the Code of Conduct Training Branch, sent each of the Department of defense Survival Evasion Resistance, and Escape (SERE}- schools a copy of the debriefing intelligence report {IR}. He included a statement of highlights and supplementary information to the IR, which were classified to protect those individuals who may have been subjected to a similar situation in the future. peleted per 5 0.5.0. $$2(b} (1)
DOD Evasion Charts ACS/I Establishes Policy Gn 12 Apri} 1986, Maj. Gen. Pfautz, the ACS/I, estabiished responsibilities for the development of Departinent of Defense {DOD} evasion charts, His action stemmed from a meeting 24 January 1984 between representatives of the Defense Mapping agency’s Plans and Requirements Qirectorate (DMA/PR} and the ACS/i*s action officers in the AFIS Directorate of Targets {AFIS/INT} ano Joint Services Support Oirectorate {AFIS/INU). At the meeting, it was agreed that AFIS/INE should consolidate worldwide annual area requirements for evasion charts and forward then to AFIS/INT for validation and submission to Uma,  AFIS/INT and AFIS/IKU were to work together to review evasion chart specifications and to make recommendations to the acS/1,7 The ACS/I established three policies to unify att efforts related to evasion chart production: i. Requirements for plastic evasion charts will be established for tactical users, wno do not require an axcessive number of evasion charts for their relatively short-range misstons. Development of a hand-held chart viewing device, with miniaturized maps and magnifying optics, will continue for stretegic users, who would otherwise need to carry an impractical aumber of bulky evasion charts. 2. Unified commands will establish evasion chart requirements for their component commands, and will forward 2 singie requirement to ArIS/Inu. NU will) review aad consolidate al} eyasion chart requirements and forward them to Dé through the AFIS Directorate of Targets (HQ AFIS/INT). 3. Specified commands will forward their evasion chart requirements directly to AFIS/INU in accordance with para Sa(3}(f}, JCSM 718-83.  AFIS/INU will review specified command requirements and coordinate them with unified command requirements, and will forward thes to AFIS/INT for validation and submission to Dida, Meeting with DMGAC Representative On 27 March, Capt. Paul R. Broshear and MSqt Charles W. Lovelady of the directorate, met with representatives of the Defense Mapping Agency Aerospace Center {OMMAC) in St. Louis, peleted per 3 U.S-C. SS2(d) (9
Missouri, to discuss and establish evasion chart specifications. Each item was discussed at length and no major problems were encountered. The representatives in attendance agreed to produce a prototype chart of the services’ major SERE training areas in the CONUS instead of operational areas. Plant recognition data was to be provided by AFIS/INU by the end of January 1985. A tentative completion date of summer 1985 was set for the evaluation of prototype maps. Geographic coordinates of training areas were also to be supplied by AFIS/INU. The training areas chosen were for Fairchild AFB, Washington (USAF); Fort Bragg, North Carolina {USA}; Cherry Point, North Carolina (USNC); Brunswick NAS, Maine (USN); San Diego, California (USK-USMC} ; {usar} 8s Nevada (USAF-USMC}; and Colorado Springs, Colorado Us . Some of the evasion chart specifications were the following: 10 Names of features shown in both English and local lenguage scripts Ocean currents shown Charts printed on spun-bound Glefin (Tyvek) or similar material to insure Strength, wet<weather durability, weight, etc Unprinted and holiday areas toned down for camouf lage purposes Small star chart positioned near one corner of the chart Color pictures and textual descriptions of edible plants shown In arid/desert regions, rules far finding water inc luded DOD Directive 1300.7 Revised On 19 December 1984, the Deputy Secretary of Defense signed the revised DOD Directive 1300.7, “Training and Education Measures Necessary to Support the Code of Conduct." The revisions established a palicy concerning the conduct of U.S. military personnel isolated from U.S. control during peacetime and required that AFIS/INU moniter and evaluate ongoing B00 Code of Conduct related training programs and establish and disseminate policies, procecures, and guidance for the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sanpower, Installations and Logistics regarding the training programs.
Sead In part the guidance for U.S. military personnel isolated from U.S. contro. stated the following: GENERAL: U.S. military personnel captured or detained by hostile foreign governments or terrorists often are held for purposes of exploitation of the detainees or captives, or the U.S. Government, or all of them. This exploitation can take many forms, but each form of exploitation is designed to assist the foreign government or the terrorist captors. In the past, detainees have been exploited for information and propaganda efforts, including confessions to erimes never committed, all of which assisted or lent credibility to the detainer. Governments also have been exploited in guch situations to make damaging statements about themselves or to force them to appear weak in relation to other governments. Ransoms for captives of terrorists have been paid by governments, and such payments have improved terrorist finances, supplies, status, an¢ operations «- often prolonging the terror carried on by such groups. ad RESPONSIBILITY: U.S. military personnel, whether detainees or captives, can be assured that the U.S, Government will make every good faith effort to obtain their earliest release. Faith fn one’s country anc its way of life, faith in fellow detainees or captives, and faith in one's self are critical to surviving with Ronor and resisting exploitation, Resisting exploitation and having faith in these areas are the responsibility of at} Americans. On the other hand, the destruction of such faith must be the assumed goals of ail captors determined to maximize their gains from a detention or captive situation. GOFL: Every reasonable step must be taken by U.S. Military personnel to prevent exploitation of themselves and the J.S, Government. If exploitation cannot be prevented completely, every step must be taken to limit exploitation as much as possible. In a sense, detained U.S. military personnel often are catalysts for their own release, based upon their ability to become unattractive sources of exploitation. That is, one who resists successfully may expect detainers to lose interest in further exploitation attempts. Detainees or captives very often must make their own judgments 2s to which actions will increase their chances of returning home with honor and dignity. Without exception, the military member wha can say honestly thet he or she has done his or her utmost in a detention or captive
situation to resist exploitation upholds DOD policy, the founding principles of the United States, and the highest traditions of military service. Requirements for Levels Band € Trainin On 21 December 1984, three days after the signing of the revised’ 000 Directive 1300.7 Colonel Webb, the director of AFIS/INU, distributed to each of the military services the “Requirements for Level 8 and Level C Training in Support of the Code of Conduct," which provided the minimum training requirements necessary to implement Level B and Level € training as required by DOE Directive 1300.7.13 in nis letter accompanying the requirements, Colonel Webb stated the following: 1 In 1984, approximately 30 years after the signing of Executive Order 10631 establishing the Code of Conduct, approximately 20 years after the issuance of the original Guu Oirective 1300.7, and almost four years after the establishment of a BOU Executive Agent, adequate anc appropriately uniform Code of Conduct related training throughout the DOO stil? does not exist for militery personne] of moderate ar high risk of capture. Senior LO personne! consider it time to make sweeping changes if we are to correct the situation. Tnerefore, this instruction is disseminated, as Dou policy, on behalf of the Assistant Secretary of Gefense for Manpower, installations, and Logistics. Code of Canduzt Education and Training Materials 7 Training Film “Tightrope” & Throughout the year, the directorate cocrdinated with each of the military service's training departments on a training film for Levels &@ and € resistance, for individuals with moderate or high risk of capture. Robert L. Heckler, a contractor with the Defense Audiovisual Agency, wrote the script. On li January, the final draft of if was sent te each service, and each gave its approval for it. Qn 24 duly, the directorate submitted a request through HQ USAF/XOORV to the dsint Services Audio-Visual Production Group for approvat of the film as a joint service production. The film was approved, As of December, each military service was staffing the paperwork for the movie for funding purposes .i>
84 The proposed title of tne movie was “Tightrope,” and it was te depict a captive environment in a non-descript Communist country, It was to show prisoners of war experiencing al} aspects of captivity and coercive pressures as well as various aspects of the exploitation process. The product was te identify and teach the following resistance training subjects: 1) the exploitation pro-cess, including propaganda, indoctrination, and interrogation, 2) the pressures encountered in a captive environment, and 3) the methods approved by DOD to resist. Je AFRTS MEDIA Spots Ur. 2 March 1984, the director of INU requested that American Forces Information Service update certain Code of Conduct “spots” being broadcast over the Armed Forces Radio and Television tation (AFR7S} which were approaching their dates of obsolesence. The service approved the request, and on 9 November Mr. Mitchell of IhUAX met with representatives from AFRTS to review and discuss concept/treatment proposals. Production of the new spots was expected to begin in early spring 198%. RIDGE RUANER G4 The directorate conducted the Exertise RIVGE RUNNER 84 between 21 August and 4 September 198¢ at Camp Dawson, West Virginia. This was the fourth exercise in an annual series of training exercises devoted entirely to the subject of evasion. RIDGE RUNNER orovided a training program for selected members of all four U.S. armed services and of NATO, whose duties entailed 1) the teaching and/or briefing of evasion to combat personne? or 2) the conducting of basic, advanced, or continuation evasion training. & tote] of sixty-four enlisted and twenty-seven officers were on Station, by the manning of 22 August to participate in the exrcise.4& e Runners received classroom and field instruction plus briefings by guest speakers who told of their actual combat evasion experiences during World war I] and Vietnam. Following this, they participated in a week of field maneuvers where they put to practice the principles atd techniques recetyed in the classroom. Additionally, the runners were exposed to a variety of realistic evasion conditions and circumstances that provided them with useful experiences and thus increased their credibility when they conducted future instructional sessions. Finalty, the runners participated in smal} an¢é large group seminars in which they shared experiences and insights with each other and discussed “lessons learned.” All runners were efferded a further opportunity to express themselves throuch written critiques.+”
On 24 August, the runners were transported to the 10G0- acre training area and received field instruction and supervised practice on the following subjects: 1) evasion field living, which included information on water, food, shelter, fire, care and use of clothing and equipment, 2) camouflage and hiding, and 3) day and nighttime navigation. Training commenced at 0800, 24 August, and terminated at 0300, 25 August, after the last student reported in from the night movement problem. One student was injured from a fall, received a mild concussion, was treated by medical Personnel, and was subsequently released from the exercise. 20 Runner personne] were recovered and returned to Camp Rawson six UH1-H sorties flown from the Army National Guard aviation facility at Parkersberg, West Virginia. As the runners were returned to Camp Gawson, they were met by a member of the exercise staff, and an imitial debrief was conducted. Runners were asked if they stole or damaged any property. This was done to reimburse the local residents and maintain good -eiations. After a short welcome pack on 3 September 1984, runusers were dividad into small seminar groups to review the entire exercise. During the smal} group seminar sessions, @ spokesman for the group was identified to make a presentation during the main debrief, and seven presentations were made by these spokesmen during this time. The subject matter of the presentativa ranged from lessons learned and petty gripes to constructive, shjective criticisms of the exercise. Additionally, students were asked to complete a written critique. At the end of the debrief session, RIGGE RUNNER certificates were presented to the runners by Lt. Col. Ledbetter. Closing comments were made and the official portion of the exercise was completed. At 0500, 4 September, runners and sonessentiat staff were out-processed. Bus transportation to the Morgantown, West Virginia, airport was provided. 85 Deleted per 5 U.S.C. 352(b) (1)
86 Lessons Learned and Recommendations Sp The following are RIDGE RUNNER 84 “lessons earned" :24 a. Based on critique documentation from the past four RIDGE RUNNER exercises, we perceive a need for a joint 00D advanced evasion training for aircrew personnel. 6. Evasion charts printed on Tyvek are far superior to paper charts in durability, other uses and life expectancy. e. &dditional evasion training for personnei in positions affecting evasion operations ang planning is needed, GBM The following are RIDGE RUNNER 84 recommendations:26 a. Recomnend that careful consideration be given to estabiishing a jotat advanced evasion school for al] oud aircrews members. b. Reconmend that RIDGE RUNNER be terminated for 2 perio¢ of one yser in order to evelvate other avenues of reacning mare personne] witn existing resources/progr afis. ¢. Recommend evaluation ef evasion portions of alt command7JCS exercises by the executive agent action office. d. Recommend evasion continuation training programs for aircrews ang intelligence personne! be evaluated to determine suitability/effectiveness. & 2. Recommend Tyvek spun brand ortifin be used to print evasion charts, SEKE Seminars GBB Or 26-30 Mey 195%, Mr. Mitchell visited the U.S. Navy Survival, Evasion, Resistaace, end Escape (SERE}) School, Naval Air peleted per § U.S.C. $52(b) (1)
Station, North Island, California, to conduct the resistance training seminar, His presentation was to approximately sixty- five SERE instructars and addressed the physical and psychological pressures of captivity, the exploitation process. and the use of OO-approved resistance techniques. Also briefed were the interrogation: 1) friendly, 2) shock and surprise, 3} fear and despair, 4} threat and rescue, $) accusations, 6} disgrace, 7) non-interrogator, and 8) electronic. On 10-2) November, Mr. Mitchell visited the U.S. Navy SERE School, NAS, Brunswick, Maine, to conduct another resistence training seminar. This was presented to approximately forty Navy SERE instructors and covered the same information presented at NAS North Igtand.26 Representation at CIS Conference “es On 27-30 November 1984, Major Oussavlt and Mr. Mitchel! attended the Survival Course Training Standards {CTS} Conference (S-¥80-A) held at Fairchild AFB, Washington. They attended as the representatives of the DOD executive agent {EA} for SERE tratnisg. The Air Training Command sponsored the conference. Although there was no requirement for ATC to invite AFIS/INU representatives to the conference, INU‘s participation appeared to have permitted personnel from #Q USAF/MPPTF and HQ ATC/DON to better ungerstand DOD-level concerns about SERE and Code of Conduct Training. At the conference, Major Dussault confirmed the following information, which would affect the USAF Code of Conduct training program: a. the Military Airlift Commanc had an S-¥80-A watver policy for all crews with more than then years of flying time, Major Dussault recommended that iNu take steps to get USAF /MPPTF peleted per 5 U.S.0, $$2(b} (1) 87
MSgt Lovelady concluded that the information presented to aircrews by Det 2 personnel was up-to-date, informative, and presented in a professional and outStanding manner, At the very jeast, the Uet 2 program could serve as a continuation trainin model for aircrews in the DOU. Also, the combat evasion/survival scenarios during GREEN FLAG 84-03 could be valuable to the INU Training Branch ia the formulation of evaston tactics and policy and in writing the preneed joint evasion manual. > on i) bool = v7} S o “wt ae : bd a 3 “ * 2 Ea 3 Fe s “ ao o 8
to clarify the waiver policy, He asked, “Are MAC crews considered high risk? If so, they all need training. If not, none need Level C, technically. "31 b. There was 2 S-V¥80-A backlog of 8,919 active aircrews, “Obviously these 8,919 are not being adequately trained!" The major stated, 32 c. The training capacity for the S-V80-A program was governed by billeting facilities. The facilities which had existed during the Vietnam era, had been partially converted to offices for wing atd squadron personnel. The conversion reduced billeting facilities and the capacity of the S-¥80-A program by approximately 50 percent. * d. HQ ATU agreed to pursue joint service water training using the dunker model for helicopter pilots and crews. barrad e. The Arctic School, an environmental school, was regularly attended by both Air Force and Army aircrew personnel, which made the school @ one-service operation with joint service attendance.35 : f. Soite major. commands wanted a desert school or some intense desert training. 36 ‘ Participation in Exercises Personnel from the Training Branch {INUA} participated in three major exercises in 1984, either as observers or as key players. GREEN FLAG 84-03 = WSgt. Charles k. Lovelady monttored Exercise GREEN FLAG 84-02 at oftetlis AFB, Nevads, 11-17 March 1984. During the exercise he gathered information pertinent to operational evasion zs implemented against the threat present during the exercise. The data was to be used in documenting operational evasion golicy and tactics in the proposed joint operational evasion manual. He observed the following segments of the exercise: F- 415 pilot single evader Scenario; combat survival training courses single evader combat extraction; and F-4 pilot single evader scenario. On the last day, he met with the commander and staff of Bet 2 3636 CCTW to summarize the week's observations and discuss initiatives dealing with combat survival and operational evasion which were on-going or likely to arise in the future. 36
Subexercise FLEETDEER 84 On 21 April « 12 May 194, Lt. Col. Larry Ledbetter, ‘obert Dussault, and Mr. John Mitchell observed subexercise FLEETDEER &4 of FLINTLOCK 84, provided assiscance to the HQ EUCOR exercise staff for other ‘84 and '85 exercises, and provided Cade of Conduct related training to FLEETDEER exercise participants. They accomplished these tasks at HQ Special Gperations Command Europe (SOCEUR}, Patch Barracks, Vaihingen, Germany, and the Exercise Interrogation Facility (IF) at Nagold, Germany.23 The most significant area that needed improvement, according to the Ind participants, related to the final exercise Deleted per 3 0.8.6. 552(b) (1)
debriefing and personal critique for the evader/POw participant. The purpose of that portion of the exercise was to reinforce learning derived from the exercise, to share experiences so other participants could learn fro someone else's experiences, to discuss the group's performance from the exercise staff's point of view, and to provide an opportunity tu answer questions that may have developed as a result of any phase of the exercise. The Jatter, according to the INU observers, included a very poorty planned effort to discuss and critique the participants’ performance in the captivity and interrogation. phase. The critiques were unstructured and achieved little or no learning benef it.44 a The INU participants recommended the following: That all future Fleetdeer exercises of similar participant size and including a captivity/interrogation phase emplcy approximately six qualified resistance training instructors from the USAF Survival Schoo! at Fairchild AFo, wa. These instructors could assist in the acaderics portion of the exercise but more importantly could develop and conduct a structured participant critique/feedback portion of the exercise to achieve maximut. learning benefit. another benefit resulting from these resistance trainjng instructors relates to the HUMIAT interrogators. The latter would no longer be encumered with the requirement of providing the evader/PGx a critique during the exercise debriefing. This would allow the interrogators to concentrate on their profession of interrogation and not place on some of them the burden to provide guidance relating to the resistance training. This recommendation has been discussed with the exercise director, the Chief of the exercise IF, and the Commander of the  3612CCTS. Trey favor the recommendation and plan to implemeat the recomnendation in next year’s exercise. NOTE: If qualified resistance training instructors are not employed in future exercises of this type, the interrogation/resistance training portion of the exercise would not be in consonance with DUD policy.%° 91 Deleted per 5 U.S.C. 352(b} (4)
92 Evaluation of USAFA SERE Program Personne] from the Training Branch conducted an evaluation of the Air Force Academy's ,Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape (SERE} Training Program from 3 ta 16 dune 1964. Thi g was done in accordance with 06D Directive 1300.7 and AFR $0- 16. GEIB Sone of the conclusions were the foliowing:5° 1. The SER? Training Progra met Level € requirements of 06D Directive 1300.7, 2. The Resistance Training Laboratory (RTL) and Field training were well organized and professionally conducted. 3. The academic presentations prior to the RTL and Field Training were not of the high quality observed during INU‘s evaluation conducted in Juty 1982 and barely met POL 1300.7 requirements. 4, the survival portion of the SERE program was oriented to a peacetime situation with the objective being to stey alive until someone friendly located and rescued the survivor. DOC SERE training policy dictated that a1? SERE programs be combat oriented. The emphasis had to be on developing realistic training which provided the student the ability to stay alive in a combat environment, prevent an Deieted pax $ U.S.C. 5326) GL)
enemy from capturing him or her, and successfulty evade and ultimately return co friendly control. ba The evaluators sent the WSAFA six and one half pages of recommendations for improving the academy's SERE program. Colonel Webb stated, “This Olrectorate remains eager to assist CxI in its continuing efforts to provide quality training.” Review of Manuats ang Course Standards Personnel from the training branch reviewed three manuals during the year and proposed course training standards for course S$-¥80-A. AFM 64-X% Ia February, Colone] Webb sent to the USAF /MPPTF and ATC/OGs a thirteen-page critique of the proposed Survival manual AFM 64~KX. The directorate's general recommendations were to reformat the document to address subjects by geographical zone, to serutinize the document for copyright infringements, ané to carefully adit to include standardization of style and readability. =¢ AFM 64-5 Irn May, Colone? webb sent ATC/VONZ four and & half pages of suggestions ta correct draft AFM 64-5. A major suggestion was to adopt an AF Form 1000 suggestion, entitled "Combat Survive? Checklist,” or @ substitute Chapter 1 for AFM 64-5. The Vist consisted of eight parts: 1} After Landing, 2) Moving to a Kolg- Up Site, 2) Selecting @ Hold-Up Site, 4) Actions to Cansider at a Hold-lip Site, 5) Movement and Trave! Considerations, 6} Movement and Travel Techniques, 7) Recovery Site Selection, and &} SAR Communication Procedures.> 4 Army FM 21-76 On 18 October 1984, Lt. Col. Ledbetter informed the commander of the Army's JF Special Warfare Center, Special Forces School, SERE Division, that Army FM 21-76, Survival, was ia comliance with DO? training policy. He also sent sixteen pages of recommended changes to the text and appendices. Staff from INU believed that the manual, because of its format, contest, end style would be widely used throughout the BOD SERE training commun ity.> 93
94 ATC Course Training Standard On 30 April 1964, the directorate informed HQ USAF /MPPTF that Its personnel had reviewed the proposed course training standard for course S-V60-A, Basic Survival, and found that the document complied with Department of Defense policy. Four minor suggestions were offered to improve the document. Colonel Webb concluded by stating, "He applaud the new course description's emphasis on ‘combat survival.‘ This approach reflects the DOD position that all SERE training must stress the combat environment with only minimum attention given te a non-hostile situation. "95 ATC Course S-V80«A From 10 October to 25 October 1984, the INU directorate conducted an evaluation of the aie Training Command Course S-VB0-A at Fairchild AF, washington. In fis general comments Colonel Webd stated that the quality of instruction observed was some of the finest observed within the Department of Defense. The instructors and supervisors observed demonstrated professionalisn in every regard and were obviously dedicated to maximum student learning. Some areas of training, nowever, did require changes, and these were seat on 30 Noverber 36 Special Experience Identifier for ERs ‘ In May the directorate requested that HQ USAF /MPCRPQI revise the special experience identifier “T2," which was the SEL for evasion and escape (E82) operations. The suggestion revision read" "Requires completion of USAF Combat Survival School, participation as an evader in at least one additional field evasion exercise, and three years experience as an £&f instryctor in a fighter, bomber, FAC or special operations flying unit"? The greposed revision substituted “three = years experience as an ESE instructor in a #. . fiying unit“ for the origins? “18 months experience in ERE staff duty." This was to insure that individuals had first-hand experience with real-world ERE considerations before being assigned to E&E staff duty. The proposed revision also deleted the requirement of “participation in the management of ER£ operations during at least one field training exercise." Managing an E&E exercise was actually part of the job description of an £8 steff officer, and individuals usually met this criteria after they had worked as an ELE staff officer.53 GRAD the request was approved without revisions.59
7o LIBRARY ARCHIVES ACTIVITIES Transferral of Code of Conduct Historian-{ ibrarian Function & conference on the transferral of the Code of Conduct histortan-librarian function to GQ AFIS/INU from the Tibrary of the 3636 Combat Crew Training Wing (CCTW} was held in February at Fairchild AFB, Washington. In attendance were Mr. dohn Milton, the librarian for the 3636 CCTK, Capt. George Ifland, representing HQ ATC/DON, and from INU Lt. Col. Larry Ledbetter, Mr. dotn Mitchell, and Mr. Kar? Gwens. Mr. Qwens, who was the chief of the Library Archives Branch {INUAC), faventoried most of the CCTR's library holdings of unpublished documents and arranged for copies of key bibliographies to be forwarded to INUAC.o/ At the conference the following points were agreed uponi’s ¥ a. AFIS/INU will assume the functions of historian and librarian as outlined in AFR 50-16. ee b. All requests for SERE related information originating outside the 3636 will be funneled through AFIS/ENU for resolution. beard c. The 3636th library is no longer required to collect Code of Conduct related material as required by DOD 1300.7, d. HQ ATS retains responsibility for and authority over the 3636 library function. Deleted per 5 3.5.0. 552{b) (4)
As of 1 March 1964, the Inu directorate assumed the responsibility for the Cade of Conduct librarian and and historian function, 69 Butiding 3 Reference | ibrar: Since the directorate was responsible for Cade of Conduct librarian and archival functions, Mr. Owens worked to systematically expand the directorate’s holdings. Registration with OTIC On 37 duly FNUAC's application was approved for registration with the Defense Technical Information Center (OTIC} for the acquisition of scientific and technical information services. & quantity of SERE subject documents hed already Seen entered into the DTIC date base by the 2636 CCTW {ATC} library prior to transfer of the historian-lbrarias function to TSUAC. Registration with OTIC was expected to give INUAC direct Tibrarian access to these and other materials either in microfiche or hard copy. The branch could also enter selected items into the orice data base for the convenience of military schools and other authorized users and to help moderate the direct demands upon the services./ Contact with AFHAC amd AUL On 16-27 July, Mr. Qwens performed his anaual reserve active duty tour at the Air Force Historical Research Center {AFRRC) and Air University Librery {AUL} at Maxwell AFB, Alabama. He produced a Code of Conduct bibliography there and established points of spntact with the archivists and librarians at these facilities,” Registration with Army Library + In October, Mr. Gwens made an initial visit to the office of Ms. Ruth Mullane, the chief of the Reader Service Branch, the Army Litrary (Pentagon}, and made arrangements for INUAC to be officially registered with the Army Library, thus allowing INUAC official access to al} of the library's services, including its data bases, He also discussed updating of the Army Library's prisoner of war bibliography that was published in March 1972 and ast supplemented in February 1980. ms. Mullane suggested that INUAC write a letter to the Library's Girector, Ms. Dorothy A. Cross, explaining our mission, and its need for the Army Library's support, whick was done, As of Gecember, no decision had been made regarding the update. On 7 December, Mr. Gwens again visited the library and officially registered ENUAC in the mane of “DOD Code of Library.“ Mr, Owens and Mr. doha Mitchell were listed as the authorized users. 97
38 Survey of Brunswick SEXE Librery From i9 to 22 November, Mr. Qwens accompanied Hr. Mitchéhi on a TRY trip to the Navy SERE School et Grunswick, Maine. His purpose was to survey the SERE reference library and meet with the staff. Mr. Owens participated in discussions with Mr. Odom, the SERE curriculum specialist, concerning the functions of INU's library and their reference facility. These discusstons highlighted several areas in which INUAC and the SERE library could mutually support each other. Mr. Odom agreed to provide a bibliography of his holdings to INUAC, while INUAC agreed to provide copies of the six anonymous USAF POW debriefing summaries previous ty sent to the U.S. Air Force Academy SERE training program.” Purchase of Books and Equipment An initial request on 16 September for the purchase of published books on POw experiences was submitted to the Washington Area Contract Center (KACC}. This, however, did not prove to be an effective way to rapidly duild the INUAC reference library of books, a5 the WACC selected source did not deliver any of the books before the end of 1984. INUAC was considering a request for blanket purchase agreements with sources of its own selection. An equipment procurement package on 18 Cctober was entered into the -supply system for purchase of a portable microfilm camera and a universal microform reader-printer. Uelivery of this equ ipggnt to INUAC was expected to be completed sometime in danyary 1985. Doleted per § U.8., 552(b)(2}
100 SGIKT SERVICES SUPPORT Antiterrorism Activity Representation on ATG In January, the chief of staff of the Air Force directed thatein ATG be established. The group’s charter was to examine terrorism as 3 new form of armed conflict, review capabilities to combat it, identify weaknesses in the Air Force's ability to meet the increasing threet, and recommend appropriate courses of action. Genera} Scheidel, who was the assistant inspector general for Security Police, chaired the group, which had representation from across the Air Steff. Maj. Robert Oussavit of the Directorate of Joint Services Support represented AFIS/INU es @ member of ATG's Antiterrorism Training Subgroup, which first met 27 ganuary 1984, He briefed the members on INU’s antiterrorisa training and education responsibilities. 9 By 16 May 1962, the ATG completed its review and reportes its findings. In the group’s “USAF Antiterrorism Task Group Report on Air Force Capabilities to Combat Terrorism,” the Deletog per $U,S.C, S52(b)(2,)
following section reparted on AF/IN and AFIS activities regarding antiterrorism. Representatives of AF/IN provide briefings to a number of BOD agencies on how to survive hostage situations with honor. The briefings were initiated shortly after the seizure of the US Embassy fn Iran in November 1979. Jo date, over 5,000 personne! have been briefed. Regular recipients of the briefings inc tude Students at: the Defense Intelligence College, the Marine Security Guard School, the Oefense Institute of Security Assistance Management Schoo}, the National Defense University, the Department of State's “Coping with Violence Abroad” course, and the USAFSOS “Dynamics of International Terrorism” course. After reviewing a draft chapter for the Air Force Antiterrorism group and discussing issues with AF/XOXP/I1GT and MPPTF, Colonel Webb, the director of INU, was fully supportive of AF/IGT becoming the central antiterrorism peacetime hostage survival manager responsible for validation and prioritizing peacetime hostage training requirements. He stated, “Ne concur with all portions of the revised draft. . . wherein AF/XO'S replacement of AF/IGT management has been rescjnded.8 Deleted per 5 U,S.t. 552(b) (2) 101
102 Quotas for BIT Course bg Early in 1984, the INU directorate requested and received two training quotas for attendance at the Dynamics of International Terrorism (DIT) Course, offered at Hurlburt Field, Florida. A one-person quota for each of the April and dune DIT courses was also requested. The directorate justified the attendance based upon its responsibilities to under AFR 208-1, “U.S, ir Force Antiterrorism Sregran,” DUG Girective 1300.7, "Training and Education Measures Necessary to Support the Code of Conduct,“ and the development of the HIT program. Production of Fitm From 3 to 7? Uecenber, a film about surviving peacetime hostage captivity was made in and around Fort Belvoir, Virginta. A professional actor and members of the participated in acting ovt the film's plot. Capt. dames C. Stevens and ‘Sgt John K. Fristoe were the technical advisors and managers of the fflm, which was made prigarily for Air Force personne! in or traveling to high risk areas.® INU diractorate peletead per 5 0.S-C- 5$2¢b) (1) g.t. 5320)(D peleted pet 5 8.
104 pOu EBS Prooras Discussions of the fvasion Group at the Worldwide Specta} Gperations Conference, 5-7 December 19B3, produced four actions designed to revamp the DOD £26 program, The four actions were the following: 1) publish a joint avasion manual and a joint escape ftanual, 2} review and change, as equipment, kits, necessary, EE and charts, 3) coordinate and publish debrief procedures, and 4) publish, if required an f&E 8nd Escape (E8t) Working security guide. As af September 1984, the INU ¢irectorate had accomplished the following regarding £gt: BM The joint evasion manual wes in the final drafting §.G. 59200) pelered per 5 Uy
stage and had been reviewed informally by service representatives at Exercise R1uGc RUNKERSS, The joint escape manual was to be the first OGb attempt to assemble in one document escape procedures, techniques, and tactics. The directorate estimated that it could produce the manual by late 1985 or early 1986. if a shorter suspense was required, INU recommended that contractors’ do the research, study and writing for the manual. The directorate completed surveys of alt BOD requirements concerning chart design and coverage area. The new plastic material for the maps was tested at RIDGE RUNNER 84, asd alt requirements were formally passed to the Befense happing Agency. Regarding the evasion chart viewer, UNU was surveying GiU for the numerical requirement of devices to complete PU actions, and it was redrafting a statement of need to reflect less stringent design requirements. with E&E kits, Inu completed @ review of the ESE survival kit concept and compiled comments and a praposat for improved kits. The ESE security guide outlined program-wide security procedures to protect atl classified information related to €&& under JCSK 715-83. The final draft of the guide was going through a final INU review, s52{b) 41> Deleted por 5 0.5.0, “~ 2 = a a A 3 uw Fs ” be S a & 4 ri s 105
Law of Ker and tegal Matters Law of War korkshap Gn 5-9 March 1984, Colonel webb, the INU director, attended the Law of War workshop at the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General's School, Charlottesville, Virginia. Secause PNG was the action office for the secretary of the Afr Force on atl Code of Conduct anc captivity related training in 000, operational evasion and escape for the Joint Chiefs of Stef#, as well as the provider of specialized training for peacetime hostage survival under the antiterrorism regulation AFR 208-1, INU requested and received positions for attendance at the Legal Aspects of Terrorism Course and the Advanced Law of War Seminar.93 Definition of “Prisoner of War“ In July, the 000 definition for “prisoner of war” for the ovo Pub 1, "DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms,“ was submitted by HQ USAF/XOX1D. The IMU director had reviewed and commented on the proposed definition in December 1963 and July 1984, Deleted per 5 U.S.C. 5$2(b} (1)
USCENTCOM Legal Conference Gn 5-9 November 1984, Lt. Stevens of INU attended the USCENTLOM 2nd Annual Legal Conference, MacDill AFB, Florida. Some of the topics of discussion were the following: rules of engagement, naval warfare, overflight, threat assessment, Pw issues, and terrorism, NAM POW Briefing On 23 June 1984, Colonel Webb and Major Oussault gave 4 INU functions briefing to the Vietnam prisoners of war {HAM POW} reunion in Austin, Texas. Colonel webb, himself a Vietnam prisoner of war, presented an overview of the DOD executive agent responsibilities related to Code of Conduct training under B00 Directive 1300.7, as well as an update concerning the DOD policy on Article ¥ of the Code, 2 revised by the past Vietnam Blue Ribbon Vefense Review Committee. 107 Deleted per 5 U.5.0. 352(b} (4)
a Secretary of the Air Force, Verne Orr, Jr., after hts visit to the Directorate af Joint Services Support on 10 Feb 1984. With hiw are Colone? Ronald J. Webb, Director of INU, Cotonel Miltiam B. Sherman, AFIS Vice Commander, and Colonel Jacques @, Kiein, Mobilization Assistant to the Deputy Assistant Chief of Staff/intelligence,
@ The staff of the Directorate of Joint Services Support (AFIS/IMU). eated left to right: Kajor Robert G. Dussault, Colonel Ronald J. Webb {Director}, Lfeutenant Colonel Larry L, Ledbetter, SMSgt Wendell Hewson. The Jadies standing left to right: Sheila A. Epps, Barbara 8. fox. The sen standing left te right: MSgt John K. Fristoe, Loreto J. Stracqualuris, Captain Clyde Law, TSgt James C. Carmichael, John A. Mitchell, TSqt Alten frickson, Richard Shear, gt Charles W. Lovelady, Kar] W. Owen, Captain Paul R. Sroshear, Captain Thomas R, McCabe, Captain James C. Stevens.
ROW 10 FIND THE NORTH STAR T Pur up a lich ar cod on neor to verte ot powuble ng tere! plore 1 2% mash the end of the rhaddow with moll ticks ar coche allowing @ shat pervad of tone betwen mare D, A ine deowe ot OO" to 0 Sine through the markers wil be © north-snuth tenet A The markers will progren toward the for! dvring ol seasons, A section of the map used in Exercise RIOGE RUMNER, The ap was prepared and published by the 30th Engineer Battalion (Topographic) {Army). The proponent agency a the AFIS Directorate of Targets {Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy Division},
APPAYO (Sagiiaca Specs? Oeecription Aquatic gtanty wih aes. uactive, fect acomhead shaped seat Diaes Flowers art waay white, 3-pe- tated and grow o whorts of threes near the Coos Of (ne Hower stalks in she fait the pranis oraguce har smaoin. pofato-icke fydars al ine entas tong subterranean tunners These hubers may be severai feel trom ine jotant adiiat Bicams in July aod August latong tne Dorders of siveams and ponds Widely dstubuted tsaen: Wagpate wat a major s0uece OF regetabse food for many tHbes at In. aans The tubers tore on tho tat and can de prepared ay any meined thy Jaaurd De vied FOr poraToes Caueng drssipares the vathes unpleasant taste lot the raw twDes Three of the thirty types of plants shown on the specia SALSIFY ¢Tragopogos, 3 species} Deacrpvion: Geearsat o¢ perenniat herbs $4 H tatt growing from Heshy, Haproots leaves are axe broad geass: Seaves. forming broad roseties oF tufts the Gest year tresn parts have may Huice the showy. aphescat. dan: denon-ike white 00d Meads are 2-3 Hh 2CtOSs aNd are MUCH mare Can- Sprcuaus than (he yellow of Surpte Rowees Mabisat: Ory to mors! son a0 1090s ang ih waste plates Bloor in June rd duly are: Roots shovid be used Detore The flowering stem develops Scrape. shee, and cook inem Gane Carrots Reais tram the test year plants are best The specees T porntoius nas Deen widely CLiwated aS & 00d De. Cause OF ds unusual favor wmich fe pemnles oysters iS yA shrub QF small teow & 18 tt. tall with giternate, compouns Prooping Chatters of small, green Howers grow from the axis of toe feaves and are folicwed in fala sur- amet by white of pale yellow berries. Hable: Swamps end other wal olaces trom Meme t@ Flonda and Texas. POISONOUS FO TOUCH: Alt parts of this Slant contain an off which frequently produces severe 10- Hammation and bistering Washing enmoaciaity ater contact with atrong oad May pritvent hurthar gescomtort ‘AS with DOrsOn ivy BRD Porson OFK. (he dest comedy 53 to feetn Io FaCOg- SAr6 (hes Sant AS fo ava It Dawson and Vicinity,* used in Exerctse RIDGE RUNNER, sponsored by the AFIS Directorate of Joint Services Support. ily designed map, *Camp °
DIRECTORATE OF SOVIET AFFAIRS MISSION OF THE BIRECTORATE The mission of the Directorate of Soviet Affairs (INC) was to carry cut the U.S. Air Force Soviet Awareness Program, which was designed to keep each member of the Air Force informed and aware of Soviet doctrine, strategy, tactics, force structure, and combat employment. During wartime operations, thé < INC directorate was to provide: 1.) expertise on a wide range of Soviet military-political affairs to the Air Staff and other Washington area decision-makers, 2.) analysis of worldwide developments using past knowledge and current, ali~source information, and 3.) quick-reaction translation and analytical services as necessary through utilization of AFIS reservists. ORGANIZATION In 1984, there were ao major organizational changes within the directorate. It continued to consist of two major divisions, Literature Research (INCF) and Soviet Awareness (INCR). Positions Realigned \ Two positions were realigned, however, to provide better support for the Soviet Awareness Division (INCR), The change of an Inventory Management Specialist slot (AFSC 64550} to an Intelligence Operation Technician stot {AFSC 20170) was put into effect, and the latter position was filled during the summer 1964. The technician was primarily responsible for the upgrade and upkeep of the military display. Also, the 70270 administrative position within INC, responsible for support te the Soviet Awareness Programs, was temporarily moved to INCR to test the benefits of INCR having its own division administrative support. It was envisioned that this would streaittine supervisory lines of control. A permanent change of this position was expected to eccur in early 1985. PERSONNEL. Key Personnel Os i September 1984, Col. Lioyd T. Moore, dr, the former executive officer to the SAC/IN, replaced Col. George V. Wish as the director of INC. Colone} Wish was to retire in November 1984; however, he was extended on active duty for medical reasons. Gn i November 1984, Maj. Orr Y. Potebnya, formerly an Air Force Academy instructor, replaced Lt. Col. Larry Patterson as chief of the Literature Research Division. Lt. Col, Patterson 109
§10 retired from the Air Force. Throughout the year, Lt. Col. William C. McDonald continued as the chief of the Soviet Awareness Division. Capt. Jack J. Nettis, dr., formerly a briefer with the Soviet Awareness Division, replaced Maj, Robert Yablonski as the executive officer. Major Yablonski was transferred to the Defense Intelligence Agency, Attache Affairs. Manning Strength a As of December, the manning strength of the directorate was as follows:4 NO. AUTHORIZED NO, ASSIGNED PERCENTAGE OFFICERS 7 12 71% ENLISTED 3 9 100% CIVILIANS ae] ma 100% TOTAL 3i 26 84% At year's end, three officer billets were vacant on the thirteen-man Soviet Awareness triefing team. -One individual was reassigned to work for the deputy director for Intelligence and External Affairs, DIA, Another individual left to work for the USAF vice chief of staff, and a third was reassigned to the AF/IN~ AFIS current intelligence briefing team, From the Literature Research Division, one of the officers went to work on the Moscow- sWashington “hotline.” It seemed to INC authorities that because of the high caliber of personne) within INC, other organizations, especially those with a briefing mission, looked at INC for recruits. Unprojected losses to INC often took six months to fill and another three to four months to train repiacements, because ft was difficult to find persons who had both the Soviet studies background and the briefing ability. Manpower Reduction Proposal A In December, the AFIS vice commander requested that the directorate consider and respond to the proposal that INC identify one NCO position to lose for the effort by AFIS to identify ten positions that had to be cut by fiscal year 1986 in a mandated manpower reduction.6 The directorate was “hard pressed“ to identify a position, but eventually selected an individual within the Soviet Awareness Division (INCR), since the Literature Research Division (INCF} was already manned at one-third of its officer authorizations.? In making the selection, the director described the impact of the reduction as follows:
INCR Ras a critical imbalance of officer/entisted personnel under current manning. The 201X0 incumbents are required to courier, process, disseminate, file and purge all daily traffic. They are responsible for proper cataloging, production, control, and maintenance of division audiovisual products. This division survives because people are here to perform these necessary functions while the team travels to present the Soviet Awareness Program. Removing one of the two° Program 9 NCOs reduces our capability to maintain our program materials by 50%. The need to increase team manning has already been established to maintain our projected schedule. Loss of a 201X0 will put greater strain on an already strained team. Immediate and long term consequences will be a reduced travel schedule, a Jess effective Soviet Military Power Week program, and an overall reduction in the quality of our highly regarded programs. The decision about which ten positions within AFIS to cut was to be made in early 1985, RELOCATION TO BUILDING 1304 By the end of the year, the directorates move from Building 520 to the second floor of Building 1304 on Botting Air Force Base was nearly completed. The relocation of INC and INCR was 85 percent accomplished, with only minor construction required to complete the relocation, A sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF) still had to be built within the area of Building 1304 identified for use by the Literature Research Division, and was expected to be done in the autumn of 1985, Reservist support from the 459th TAW/CE at Andrews Air Force Base assisted with the selection. The new facility provided a more professional environment in which to present the Soyet Military Power Weeks, the Soviet Military Power Days, and other special programs. Also, the new classroom facility was larger than the previous ong, capable of accommodating one hundred students instead of seventy. SOVIET AWARENESS & The Soviet Awareness Division carried out the “spoken” or verbal aspect of the USAF Soviet Awareness Program by sponsoring the following: 1. Soviet Military Power Week - A S«day, 35-hour series of presentations. SECRET or higher clearance was needed to attend. its coverage included Soviet ideology, Russian and Soviet history, Soviet society and economy, and 4 career profile of the typical Soviet officer and enlisted
112 person. Slides, videotapes, displays of Soviet publications, posters, and other items of interest were used in the course. It was presented monthly to Department of Defense audiences e washington, D.C. and was listed in AFM 50-5, AFIS Course 1. 2. Soviet Military Power Bay - An 8~hour presentation at the SECRET Jevel, using portions of the Soviet Military Power Week Course. Tt was presented approximately six times per year in Kashington, ie 3, Soviet Awareness Team - A traveling oriefing team that conducted a i-day Soviet military power presentations to U.3. military members worldwide. SECRET clearance was needed to attend. Base theaters were used for the briefing, which was made up of slides and videotapes. The team usually stayed two days at each base, but the time varied with the size of the audience to be reached. A 2-hour unclassified FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY evening program was also offered for dependents and uncleared Air Force and Bepartment of Gefense parsonnel. The presentation was normally given in the evening while visiting bases. Statistics on Presentations ' During 1984, the Soviet Awareness Division reached nearly 35,000 people through its various programs in the Washington, 0.C. area and at bases worldwide. For__1984, attendance at Soviet Awareness presentations was as follows: 25,923 - Attendance at the classified briefing at 49 bases 3,212 - Attendance at the unclassified night show on 23 of the 49 bases visited 765 - Attendance at 10 Soviet Military Power Weeks 526 - Attendance at 12 classifieg special briefings at Bolling AFB 139 - Attendance at 3 unclassified special briefings at Bolling AFB ’ The cumulative attendance figures from 1976 through 31 December 1984 were the following: 209,773 - Classified programs 34,851 - Unctassified programs 395 - TDY deployments Briefings at UOT Bases In May, Brig. Gen. Chris O. Divich, BCS/Operatfons, HQ Air Training Command, requested that the ACS/E arrange to have the
Soviet Awareness briefings in Undergraduate Pilot Training (UPT) at each UPT base over a two-day period. he explained that the briefing was a requirement in UPT and had originally deen presented during two days, thus allowing student pilots te attend the briefing and pilot training on alternate days. The one-day briefing caused pilots to have to make up tost training time on the weekends .15 In considering the request, INC explained that in 1980 because of manning shortages in the Soviet Awareness Division, UPT bases were cut to a one day visit each year. In 1984, to accomodate the UPT bases it was decided that the Soviet Awareness briefing was returned to a two-day per base schedule for UPT bases, which were Columbus, Williams, Laughlin, Reese, and Vance, To justify the time and expense of the visits, base permanent party personnel were to attend the briefings in large numbers. At each base other than Vance, the theaters were large enough to accommodate. many others. uUPT students would have priority in attendance, Responses to Briefings Throughout 1984, the directorate continued to receive numerous tetters commending the Soviet Awarengss briefing team for {ts professionalism and outstanding presentations. Such letters, for example, came from the commandant of the Squadron Officer Schoot, Maxwell AFB; the national security assistant to U.S. Senator John Glenn; the assistant director, Intelligence Division, FBI; the commander of the Sacramento Air Logistics Center; the general counsel of the Air Force; the deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force; the commandant of the Armed Forces Staff Callege; and the commandant of the Air War College, Maxweli AFB.17 Customized Presentation ? The INC directorate made a special effort to tailor its presentations to special audiences, such as the attendees at the Brigadier Genera) Orientation Course, held in two sessions in March and April. Since the new generals had sophisticated experiences, high education levels, and previous exposure to the Soviet Awareness briefings, there was a d¢ for INC personnel to review basic Soviet doctrine. Later, tne ACS/I and DACS/I briefed generats on intelligence trends. 18 113 Deleted per 5 U.S.C. 352(b) (1)
114 Request for Second Briefing Team Through the annual budget process, the directorate made a request for three officer positions to enable the Soviet Awareness briefers to achieve a two-team capability of six members each. in justifying the request, INC stated that without the three positions, the briefing team had no time available for staying current in subject areas and in improving and updating briefings. Soviet Awareness visibility had increased with requests for lectures from the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force, and attendees at the briefings included general officers and presidential and congresstonal staff members. The Soviet Awareness team was unable to accept al? requests and meet its requirements to visit: each major Air Force base every three years, pilot and navigator upgrade training bases annually, and 30S, AFSC, ACSC, and the Air War College, Team personnel also had to be available to schedule deployments, coordinate visits with major commands and bases, review and establish curriculum, set up special presentations, and conduct training programs for new personne}. > & The three positions had been validated by AF/MPME during the fiscal year 1984 POM process, but were not funded. In the ranking of the ten AFIS initiatives for FY87-91 POM, the INC request was sixth. At the end of the calendar year 4384, however, prospects did not look good for the additional slots. Reserve Team Initiative In dune, the AFIS Pirectorate of Intelligence Reserve Forces proposed to the INC directorate that a Soviet Awareness Briefing Team within Detached Training Site (OTS} 45 of the AFIS Uirectorate of Intelligence Reserve Forces (AFIS/RE} he established, Its mission was to service Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard requests for Soviet Awareness briefings and to provide reserve support to the Directorate of Soviet Affairs. The team was to consist of seven members of OTS 45, who had an appropriate beckground for lecturing on Soviet matters and who were willing to travel TDY at least one weekend per month,.2 The teat project was identified es the “USAF Reserve Soviet Awareness Program (RSAP)" and was justified in part by the explanation that the active duty Soviet Awareness team had neither the manpower nor the time to include Reserve and Air Nationa} Guard units in their scheduled briefings, especially on training weekands .2¢ Discussions on some form of reserve participation in Soviet Awareness dated back to at least 1980. They resurfaced in 1982 in connection with Dr. Holman at the Defense Intelligence
Agency, 9 reservist and formerly with the INC directorate. The problems hindering the implementation of 3 reservist project were reserve Tinitations of man days and initial training time end currency, The effort to get the project started in 198¢ recefved a beast from encouragement from the Air Force deputy asststant secretary for reserve affairs.3 GMB At the end of 1984, the outlook for the project coming to fruttion teoked good. A memorandum of understanding between AFIS/RE and AFIS/INC was expected te be signed in 1985~. Upgrade of Soviet Awareness Fa: y ks a result of the visit by Secretary of the Air force ¥erné Orr to the firectorate of Soviet Affairs in Building $20 on Bolling AF8 in 19% an effort was launched to upgrade the directorate's faci lit: This year there were pg “najor revisions in the curriculum of the Soviet Nilitary Power Week presentation nar in the one-day eight-hour Soviet Nilitary Power Way. There was, however, a continuous upgrading of the 35 ma slides and video clips to ensure the currency of presentations. Jn late 1984 new video players, a video recorder, and a projector were purchased. The video tapes used to the lectures could now b¢ more current, because of in-house editing. In the past, at} editing had to be done at the Pentagon, causing Joss of man-hours in transit between Sotting AFS and the Pentagon. ¢? LITERATURE RESEARCH Guring the year, the directorste’s Literature Research Uiviston continued to critically review authoritative and tS Deleted per $ 9-S.C. $52(b) 1)
116 influential Soviet writings on military doctrine, strategy, tactics, and operational art and to translate selected materials into English, The division was responsible for the following publications: 1, “Soviet Military Thought” series - Translations of selected books by Soviet military authors. Subjects covered jneluded Soviet air operations and tactics, problems of contemporary war, military psychology, war and the army, and the revolution in military affairs, In 1984, the eighteenth volume in the series was published, D.A. Ivanov, ¥. P. Savel'yev, and P. ¥. Shemanskiy, fundamentals of Tactical Command and Control. The book discussed basic principles, organization, equipment support, and monitoring of command and contre? activities, as well as information acquisition and processing, decision-making, and battle planning and management .2 2. “Studies in Communist Affairs" series - Unclassified monographs written by Western military and civilian authors. The six volumes published were Joseph 0. Douglass Jr., The Soviet Theater Nuclear Offensive; Paul 3. Murphy, editor, Nava Power in Soviet Policy; Phillip A. Petersen, Soviet Air Power and Pursuit Of haw Military Options; Phillip A. Peterson, editor, Soviet Policy in the Post-lito Balkans; Joseph 0. Pougtass, dr. and Amorretta M. Hoebear, compilers, {Part 1} Selected Readings from Military Thought , 1963-1973; Joseph . Guglass, dr. and Amor- retta M. Hoeber, compilers, (Part I!) Selected Readings from Mili- tary Thought, 1963-1973.¢9 3. Soviet Press Selected Transtations {(AFRP 200-1} - Translations of current Soviet military and political articles. The publication was bimonthiy.30 GBM the Soviet Military Concepts, g series of bimonthly FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY issues, was discontinued, for two reasons: lack of manpower to do the transtations/editing and redundancy with, fhe project underway to transtate the Soviet Military Encyclopedia. Notice to FBIS = The Literature Research Division continued to inform the Centralized Translation Service (CTS} of the Foreign Sroadcast Information Service of {its translation of books, as soon as the division initiated translation projects. The CTS served as the government's central repository of information on the existence of intelligence-related translations in progress or completed. The INC directorate voluntarily reports to the CTS.3
Soviet Press Translations Requests for Translations Throughout the year, new requests for copies of the AFRP 200-1, “Soviet Press Selected Translations,” came to INC. Some of the requestors were Teledyne Brown Engineering, Colorado Springs, Colorado, which had a contract with NORAD/SPACECOM;, the Science and Policy Research Unit of the University of Sussex, Engiand; the Office of the Adjutant General, Wisconsin, Department of Milftary Affairs, Madison, Wisconsin; the Sperry Corporation, Irving, Texas, which had a DOD contract with the U.S. Army; and the Office of the Air Attache, Embassy of Australia, Washington, 0.C.33 Request for Translator/Editor In the annual budget process, the Literature Research Division submitted a request for one civilian transiator/editor to work on the continued publication of AFRP 200-1, “Soviet Press Selected Translations,” at its current length and quality. Two first lieutenants had worked on the serfes, one of whose billets was on loan and was deleted at the end of the third quarter of fiscal year 1983. In the FY87-91 POM initiative, the request was ranked eighth in the top ten. 4 a Soviet Military Encyclopedia Project In September 1984, the Directorate of Soviet Affairs requested assistance from the AFIS Directorate of Intelligence Reserve Forces in initiating procedures to provide MSgt Winston Otterson a four-week training period to prepare him to work on a two-year project of translating sections of the Soviet Military Encyclopedia. The encyclopedia was the authoritative source for Bll essential Soviet military concepts, and its translation into English was to make possible an increasa in the number of analysts who would be able to benefit from the. information therein. The {NC directorate wanted to ensure that its information was distributed within the intelligence community in a timely manner so that it was up-to-date and useable, The INC directorate was cooperating with officials in the Canadian National Defense Headquarters. to have key sections of the encyclopedia translated.3 The INC informed the RE directorate that after MSgt Otterson's training period to learn a large Russian vocabulary in @ great number of specialized military fields and to become proficient on the word processor, the INC would require his support for as long a period as he could be made available. 8y the end of the year, however, Otterson was not working full-time with Inc.36 117
118 Soviet tititary Thought Series Volume 18 of the Soviet Military Thought Series, Fundamentals of Tactical Command and Controt by O.A. Ivanov et al, was published in 1984, niS book took years to prepare for publication, partly because the INC directorate hed the book translated under contract with the Joint Press Research Service (SPRS}, but was displeased with the quatity of the JPRS‘s transiation. Br. Robert Moore of INCF undertook the project to improve the transtation to make it suitable for publication. Also, numerous problems were encountered with the company doing the typesetting for the book.37 & Another book in the series, Volume 19, The Soviet Armed Forces: A history of Their Organizational PELE was) ex- pected to be published in early 1965. The Canadian Nationa? Defense Headquarters was working on two other books, Armed Conflicts and Internetional Law and Combined Arms Exercises. Comined Arms txercises was subject to international copyright agreements, but request to the Soviets for permission to publish was not going to be made until the translation was completed, and INC was ready to begin processing the book. Otherwise, INC would have been unable to meet the deadline of eighteen months to publication, established with agreements with the Soviets. 36 Announcement to All-Uaion Copyright Agency There were no Soviet denials of permission to publish in 1984, because there were no requests involving books requiring permission. Une congition of the copyright agreement, however, was thet when @ book had been previously requested and permission denied, another request for non-exclusive license may be made wher seven years had gone by since the boox was publisned in the original, This request might be more precisely called an announcenent of intention, since no response was required from the Soviets. Three tities in various stages of progress were announced to the All-Union Copyright Agency in 1984: Problems of Military Systems Engineering by Druzhinin & Kentorov; The Initial Period ot War by lvanov; The Operational Art of the Soviet Air Force in the Great Patriotic War, edited by Jmoxhovich.s? TRAINING Attendance at Canadian Conference bd Or, Robert P. Moore of the Literature Research Division traveled to Ottawa, Canada, ia October to attend the National Symposium on Linguistic Services, sponsored by the Canadian government, and to visit the Canadian National Befense Headquarters. The conference provided him an opportunity
to get better acquainted with word processing matters and to have conversations with individuals about shared problems. The most useful papers he heard delivered were about setting up terminology banks, computer-assisted translation, and training of translators. He also met with Maureen Cote of the Foreign Broadcast Information Service {FBIS) who had been given an outstanding analyst's award to spend a year studying military (and possibly other) terminology problems, the idea being to arrive at a suggested means of providing a community-wide terminology bank. The standardization of military terminology had long been a concern of Or. Moore, ‘and he felt that a terminology bank was an excellent ides.40 Formal and Informal Training . Other training included the attendance of several members of the directorate at the annual American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Studies Conference, heid in New York City. Several members of the directorate alsa attended ¢ conference sponsered by the Office of the Secretary of Sefanse with the Texas A&M Center for Strategic Technology, held in Washington, B.C. Informal training was acquired by attendance at local seminars and conferences in the Washington area. An especiatly beneficial series was the ongoing monthly sessions held at the Woodrow Wilson Center. These usually focused on political science topics, which were presented by well-known speakers and experts. The Kannan Institute feld a weekly Wednesday luncheon session dealing solely with some aspect of the Soviet Union, its charted area of interest.42 Other formal training, especially for the travelling INCR™ team members, proved impossible because of the demanding travel schedule. As a matter of course, al? requests for participation in the Squadron Officer School were denied due to manning constraints, The directorate s%w no remedy in the near future for this undesirable situation, because of its shortage of qualified and experienced personnel,*3 Trip ta USSR In July 1984, five personnel traveling in two separate tours were able to visit the Soviet Union for orientation and familiarization purposes. These trips enabled more people from the directorate to travel to more cities than ever before. in contrast, in 1983, the trip had to be cancelled when the Soviets declined to issue visas. In 1982, only four persons made the trip, and they were restricted to only Moscow and Leningrad.44 Hig