division  chiefs,  APIS  directors  and  the  AFSAC  Commander,  discussed  and 
prioritized  software  modification  and  development  requests.  During 
the  first  Steering  Group  meeting,  the  proposed  AF/IN-AFIS  AMHS 
received  unanimous  support  and  was  therefore  included  in  the  General 
Defense  Intelligence  Program  (GDIP)  for  FY  85  funding. 101 
ft?  1*3**'  ***  "-  \*f  -' 
I* 
o 
l-l
SECUPITY  AND  COMMUNICATIONS  MANAGEMENT 
#|  P  The  Directorate  of  Security  and  Communications  Management 
(AFISHnS)  (located  at  the  Pentagon)  managed  and  evaluated  all 
collateral  security  support  functions;  controlled  and  disseminated  Top 
Secret  and  soecial  categories  of  classified  information;  and  monitored 
visit  requests  and  release  of  collateral  information  to  civilian 
contractors.  It  also  managed  the  worldwide  Air  Force  Special  Security 
Office  (AFSSO)  system  by  ensuring  compliance  with  Compartmented 
Intelligence  Security  Policy,  Special  Intelligence  Telecommunications 
Policy,  Communications  Security  Policy  and  Procedures,  Physical 
Security,  Billet  Management,  and  Personnel  Clearance  Programs  at  all 
organizational  levels. 10& 
    AFIS/INS  retained  four  subordinate  divisions  during  1982. 
These  included  the  Collateral  Security  and  Administrative  Support 
Division  (AFIS/INSA) ;  the  Personnel  Security  Division  (Billets  Branch 
and  Adjudication  Branch)  (AFIS/INSB);  the  Management  Division 
(Facilities  Branch)  (AFIS/INC);  and  the  Air  Force  Special  Security 
Office  (Product  Dissemination  Branch)  (AFIS/INSD).  Colonel  George  J. 
Mercuro  continued  as  the  overall  Director. 107 
Collateral  Security 
     Throughout   19S2,   the   Collateral   Security  Division 
(AFIS/INSA)  was  the  primary  office  of  responsibility  for  the 
collateral  security  program  within  AF/IN  and  AFIS.  As  such,  it 
provided  security  guidance  to  newcomers,  conducted  security  meetings, 
security  inspections,  conducted  investigations  on  security  incidents, 
and  monitored  downgrading  and  declassification  actions.  As  part  of 
the  downgrading  and  declassification  program,  INSA  monitored  the 
review  of  over  50,000  pages  of  material  dating  from  1955  forward,  at 
the  National  Archives  Records  Service  (NARS),  Washington,  D.C.  This 
review  was  in  relation  to  a  Freedom  of  Information  action.  The  end 
result  of  the  review  was  that  500  of  the  pages  required  continued 
classification.  AFIS/INSA  was  also  responsible  for  the  establishment 
of  'Air  Force  policy  on  the  release  of  classified  intelligence  to  U.S. 
contractors  and  monitored  one  time  requests  for  release  action.  Over 
300  one-time  requests  were  processed  during  1982  with  approximately 
11,000  documents  sent  to  U.S.  contractors  on  a  routine  basis. 108 
    Effective  1  April,  INSA  assumed  the  collateral  suoport 
functions  previously  performed  by  the  AFIS  Administration  Division 
(AFIS/DAU).  The  functions  transferred  included  Freedom  of  Information 
actions  by  AF/IN,  Pentagon  building  passes,  parking  control,  customer 
account  control  for  Pentagon  and  Boiling  AFB  activities,  space 
control,  telephone  and  interoffice  communications  control, 
transportation  control,  and  Air  Staff  mail  and  message  distribution 
systems.  Three  positions  were  transferred  along  with  the 
functions. 109 
_   INSA  assumed  a  portion  of  the  functions  previously  performed 
by  the  Intelligence  Reference  Branch  (AFIS/INDOC)  on  16  July.   One
position  was  transferred  along  with  the  functions.  The  incumbent 
served  as:  (1)  the  representative  to  the  Defense  Intelligence  Agency 
(DIA)  in  establishinq  accounts  and  requirements  for  collateral 
intelligence  publications  for  AF/IN,  AFIS,  Air  Staff,  MAJCOMS,  and 
SOAs  worldwide;  (2)  monitored  certain  Air  Force  publication 
requirements  in  the  200  series  and  miscellaneous  intelligence 
documents  to  customers  that  had  not  established  an  account  with  DIA; 
and  (3)  retained  responsibility  for  rider  actions  --  an  action  where 
DIA  had  determined  that  they  would  disseminate  to  DIA  offices  only. 
If  a  military  agency  wanted  to  send  the  document  within  their 
organization,  a  ride-on  to  DIAs  requirements  was  submitted  to  the 
Government  Printing  Office  through  the  appropriate  funding  office. 
Each  military  agency  was  responsible  for  the  cost  of  the  publication 
in  question. ^0 
tf  fe  In  late  November,  the  biographic  files  and  validation  for 
intelligence  publications  functions  were  transferred  from  AFIS/INDOC 
to  INSA.  One  position  was  transferred  with  the  functions.  This 
person  performed  these  functions  and  also  served  as  back-up  to  the 
functions  transferred  from  INDOC  in  April. HI 
flfc  AFIS/INSA  also  served  as  the  Office  of  Primary 
Responsibility  (OPR)  for  contractor  visits,  security  reviews  from  the 
Secretary  of  the  Air  Force,  Public  Affairs  Office  of  Security  Review 
(SAF/PAS),  monitored  the  Headquarters  Top  Secret  control  system,  and 
continued  as  the  control  point  for  International  Pact  Organization 
(IPO)  documents  and  other  special  category  documents. H2 
Personnel  Security 
___  The  Personnel  Security  Division  (AFIS/INSB)  managed  the 
worldwide  Sensitive  Conpartmented  Information  (SCI)  program  for  Air 
Force  military,  civilian,  consultant,  and  contractor  personnel; 
adjudicated  reports  of  investigation  on  personnel  who  required  access 
to  SCI;  managed  the  Air  Force  "SC I  billet  structure  and  access  rosters 
--  with  an  annual  workload  of  20,000  personnel  security  cases 
adjudicated,  over  30,000  cases  microfilmed,  over  50,000  file  searches 
conducted  and  personnel  indoctrinated  and  debriefed,  and  over  3,000 
billet  requests  processed;  and  insured  that  the  most  sensitive 
national  intelligence  information  was  fully  protected  and  distributed 
on  a  strict  need-to-know  basis. H3 
f|  ^  The  Intelligence  Community  continued  discussions  regarding 
the  use  of  the  polygraph  for  SCI  indoctrinated  individuals.  On  6 
August,  the  Deputy  Secretary  of  Defense  directed  that  the  military 
departments  implement  a  program  of  polygraph  screening  for  persons 
with  SCI  access.  The  polygraph  examination  would  address  counter- 
intelligence questions  only.  Under  the  new  direction,  AFIS/INSB  would 
determine  which  Air  Force  personnel  would  be  polygraohed  and  the  Air 
Force  Office  of  Special  Investigation  (AFOSI)  would  conduct  the  actual 
polygraph  examinations. H4
,    ln  September,  the  Chief  of  INSB  met  with  National  Security 
Agency  (NSA)  and  OSI  representatives  on  the  polygraphing  of  Air  Force 
military  personnel  assigned  tc  the  NSA.  It  was  agreed  that  NSA  would 
polygraph  all  Air  Force  personnel  currently  assigned  to  NSA  but  that 
AFOSI  would  assume  this  responsibility  at  a  later  date  (undetermined 
as  of  31  December)  with  polygraph  arrangements  being  made  through 
AFIS/INSB.  INSB  and  the  Air  Force  Manpower  and  Personnel  Center 
(AFMPC)  were  scheduled  to  work  together  to  establish  procedures  for 
notifying  an  individual  of  the  NSA  polygraph  requirement. 115 
m  Due  to  concern  over  the  personnel  security  investigation 
shortfalls  (i.e.  investigative  backlogs,  unacceptable  completion  time, 
etc.)  new  Special  Background  and  Periodic  Requests  (SBI-PR) 
Investigation  procedures  were  established.  The  Deputy  Secretary  of 
Defense  directed  that  individuals  indoctrinated  for  SCI  execute  an 
updated  statement  of  personnel  history  on  the  five  year  anniversary 
date  of  the  completion  of  the  most  recent  SBI.  This  version  would  be 
reviewed  by  the  supervisor  to  determine  if  any  relevant  information 
had  been  excluded.  Expanded  investiqations  would  be  conducted  only  as 
necessary  (i.e.  only  in  cases  in  which  derogatory  information  was 
found).  This  policy  was  changed  in  early  1982.  Later,  however,  it 
was  decided  that  the  Defense  Investigative  Service  (DIS)  would  resume 
investigations  for  all  SBI-PRs  by  1  April  1983. H6 
    Despite  a  substantial  increase  in  SCI  billet  requests,  the 
division  reduced  the  processing  time  to  a  minimum.  INSB  also 
developed  an  updated  program  for  billet/access  management  (SABRE). 
Eventually,  subordinate  commands  would  be  able  to  submit  billet  and 
access  changes  and  updates  electronically  through  the  AUTODIN  system 
as  required. ii/ 
    During  19S2,  all  civilian  adjudicators,  with  the  exception 
of  one  person,  attended  the  SCI  Adjudicators  course  sponsored  by  the 
CIA.  Both  adjudication  teams  held  meetings  (at  least  once  each  week) 
to  discuss  problem  areas  and  auestions  on  matters  of  policy  that  were 
in  the  process  of  being  changed  or  that  had  been  changed.  At  that 
time,  Adjudicators  were  advised  of  any  changes  affecting  SCI 
adjudication.  This  helped  ensure  standardization  of  the  adjudication 
process. 11° 
AFIS/INSB  received  approximately  35,000  Nondisclosure 
Agreements  from  individuals  authorized  SCI  access.  The  information 
was  entered  into  a  computer;  however,  the  data  was  not  stored  within  a 
DIA  storage  area  or  GSA  storage  facility.  The  division  had  asked  for 
authorization  to  do  so,  but  no  approval  had  been  received  by  the  end 
of  the  year.  INSB  also  developed  a  viable  Due  Process  program  for 
ensuring  that  each  person  denied  SCI  access  was  furnished  reasons  for 
the  denial  and  was  afforded  the  opportunity  to  appeal  that 
decision.119 
_  Throughout  the  year,  INSB  microfilmed  all  hard  copy  records 
and  incorporated  them  into  the  master  data  base.  The  division  also 
input  all  pertinent  information  of  approximately  one-fourth  of  these
records  into  the  SA3P.E  system.  This  increased  the  data  base  by  two- 
fold, tnus  eliminating  twenty  filing  cabinets,  and  providing  an 
additional  nine  feet  of  working  area.  These  actions  improved  working 
conditions  and  reduced  research  time  by  one-quarter. 120 
Security  Management 
D  The  Management  Division  (AFIS/INSC)  continued  to  perform  its 
primary  function  of  supporting  USAF  intelligence  activities  and  Air 
Force  Special  Security  Offices  (AFSSOs)  under  the  security  coqnizance 
of  the  Air  Force  Assistant  Chief  of  Staff,  Intelligence  (ACS/I).  121 
    AFIS/INSC  conducted  an  SCI  Security  Management  Course  for 
Air  Force  military  and  civilian  personnel  assianed,  or  to  be  assigned, 
to  worldwide  SCI  security  positions.  The  course  frequency  was 
established  as  bimonthly.  An  arrangement  had  been  made  with.  Palace 
Sentinel  personnel  to  routinely  schedule  all  newly  assigned  AFSS0/SS0 
personnel  for  training  enroute  PCS.  A  total  of  six  classes  were  held 
in  1982  with  87  personnel  provided  SCI  security  management  training. 
This  represented  an  increase  of  18  over  the  69  trained  "in  1981.122 
A  total  of  230  Sensitive  Compartmented  Information 
Facilities  (SCIFs)  and  46  contractor  special  security  offices  were 
accredited  under  the  Air  Force  SCI  security  management  program.  This 
included  33  AFSSOs,  of  which  one  was  added  in  1982  —  AFSSO  SE  ROCC, 
Tyndall  AFB,  Florida.  Twenty-six  new  SCIFs  were  accredited,  eight 
SCIFs  were  transferred  from  another  agency,  and  four  SCIF 
accredidations  were  withdrawn.  One  AFSSO  {AFSSO  24th  Air  Division, 
Malmstrom  AFB,  Montana)  and  one  Consolidated  Telecommunications  Center 
(CTCC)  (also  at  Malmstrom  AFB)  were  inactivated  during  the  year. 123 
  
There  were  a  total  of  246  communications  actions  and  nine 
Emergency  Reaction  Air  Force  Special  Security  Office  and  Readiness 
Command  (REDCOM)  personnel  support  actions  (in  support  of  four 
exercises)  processed  during  the  year.  In  addition,  two  DSSCS/GENSER 
consolidated  telecommunications  centers  were  created  (Eglin  AFB, 
Florida  and  Maxwell  AFB,  Alabama). 124 
^   The  upgrade  to  the  AF/IN  National  Security  Agency  (NSA)  Gray 
secure  phone  switch  was  completed  in  May  and  all  telephone  switch 
equipment  was  relocated  from  room  BD-951  to  BD-926.  This  freed  space 
for  rehabilitation  and  subsequent  use  by  the  Facilities  Branch.  The 
system  now  had  the  capability  to.  accommodate  additional  lines,  given 
sufficient  crypto  equipment,  and  functions  with  an  improved  electronic 
switch  rather  than  the  older,  mechanical  switch. 125 
Two  special  studies  were  supported  during  the  year.  The 
Facilities  Branch  continued  to  provide  information,  on  an  informal 
basis,  to  the  Government  Accounting  Office  (GAO)  (Mr.  Irving  Bocker 
and  Mr.  Jim  Reid)  on  the  Air  Force  compartmented  industrial  facilities 
protection  program.  This  was  in  support  of  GAO  Project  *009709,  OSD 
case  #6142.  The  draft  GAO  report  was  released  in  December;  INS 
responded  with  comments  on  16  December. 126
ll  The  Facilities  Branch  also  provided  information  and  support 
to  tne^louse  ADoroDt-iations  Committee  Surveys  and  Investigations  Team 
inouiry  into  the  activities  of  the  Defense  Investigative  Service  and 
SCI     carve-out     contracts.  Assistance     provided     included     systems 
descriptions,  coordination  of  selection  and  visit  to  a  typical 
multiuser  contractor,  and  the  provision  of  data  relative  to  the  amount 
of  money  spent  on  SCI  contracts  and  the  number  of  people  cleared  to 
support  these  contracts. 12? 
QH|  Throughout  the  year,  the  Management  Division  continued  to 
extend  and  improve  the  quality  of  USAF  Intelligence  (USAFINTEL) 
specialized  intelligence  publications.  Issued  in  accordance  with  AFR 
8-31,  these  publications  were  used  extensively  to  communicate 
aerospace  intelligence  and  intelligence  policies  and  procedures  which, 
because  of  their  sensitive  content,  could  not  be  included  in  standard 
Air  Force  publications.  The  division  was  also  responsible  for  nine 
USAFINTEL  201-X  se-ies  publications  which  were  distributed  through  the 
Air  Force  Special  Security  Office  (AFSSO)  system  (AFR  200-72).  Normal 
distribution  included  all  authorized  Air  Force  SCI  elements,  USAF 
Unified  and  Specified  Command  SCI  Facilities  (SCIFs),  and  other 
selected     Intelligence     SCI      activities,,  The     division     was     also 
responsible  for   the  administrative  review  of  any  USAFINTEL  publication 
produced  by  other  AF/IN  or  AFIS  elements. 128 
         Some    of    the    more    significant    changes    involved    USAFINTEL 
ReguTaTions    201-1,    201-2,    201-5    and   201-6.       A   change    was    issued    to 
USAFINTEL    201-1     (The    Security,     Use    and    Dissemination    of    Sensitive 
Compartmented      Information      (SCI)      which      added      a      new      Government 
Control led-Contractor    Operated     (G0C0)     facility;     updated    policy    on 
marking    SCI    documents;    told    how    to    account    for    SCI    working   material 
and   changed   Automated  Data   Processing    (ADP)    card   column   format   for  DD 
Form    1912    and    1913;     completely    updated    policy    on     SCI    billets    and 
related    matters;    provided    implementing    instructions    on    the    new    SCI 
Nondisclosure   Aqreement    (NDA)    and    related   forms,    and    added    policy   on 
the      release      of      personnel      security      information;      reauired      that 
destruction    priorities    be    dearly    indicated;    added    several    terms    to 
the     Glossary;     updated     examples     of     standard     forms     for     personnel 
security   reports    and   queries;    and   made    other    changes    throughout    the 
directive. 129 
IB  A  revision  was  issued  to  USAFINTEL  201-1  (Sensitive 
Compartmented  Information  (SCI)  Management  Guide)  to  update  the 
guidance  designed  to  assist  SCI  security  officials  in  performing 
inspections  and  related  visits  required  by  USAFINTEL  201-1,  ChaDter 
17.  It  was  also  used  for  local  self-evaluations,  as  a  training  aid, 
or  in  planning  and  conducting  staff  assistance  visits  to  SCIFs.  It 
was  not  a  substitute  for  basic  SCI  control   system  directives.  130 
A  revision  to  USAFINTEL  201-5  (Sensitive  Compartmented 
Information  Facility  Directory)  updated  the  manning  and  listing  of 
SCIFs     Air     Force    wide.         Two     changes     to     USAFINTEL    201-6     (Special
Intel liqence  (SI)  Classification  Guide)  addressed  guidance  on 
classification  of  USAF  reconnaissance  aircraft;  updated  items  on 
Foreign  Instrumentation  Sianals;  corrected  guidance  on  SCF.  activations 
and  fnactivations;  added  guidance  on  the  classification  of  the  SCI 
billet  structure  and  related  rosters;  and  made  other  minor  changes  in 
the  quide.l^ 
CT^^J 
Other 
urchase support   to  the   intelligence   community  included  money 
for  W^)urchase  of  ten  video  player /monitors  to  be  used  in  support  of 
SCI    indoctrination   and  education.      A  total    of   67  worldwide  Air 
SCI     security    incidents     or     violations     were     reported    to 
processing  during  1982.132 
Force 
INSC  for 
Special  Security 
o 
» 
u 
3) 
D. 
« 
4) 
iH 
O
TABLE  2-1 
SUMMARY  OF  INSD  OPERATIONS 
o 
• 
p 
m 
u 
« 
l-<
CHAPTER  III 
INTELLIGENCE  PROGRAMS 
■^  In  addition  to  direct  intelligence  support,  the  Air  Force 
Intelligence  Service  (AFIS)  continued  to  conduct  several  key 
intelligence  programs.  These  included  the  Intelligence  Reserve  Forces 
(AFIS/RE);  Attache  Affairs  (AFIS/INH);  Evasion,  Escape,  and  Prisoner 
of  War  (POW)  (AFIS/INR);  Soviet  Affairs  (AFIS/INC);  and  the  Air  Force 
Special  Activities  Center  (AFSAC).l 
INTELLIGENCE  RESERVE  FORCES 
Mission 
MISSION  AND  RESOURCES 
^_  The  Intelligence  Reserve  Forces  Division  (AFIS/RE)  directed 
the  Air  Force  Intelligence  Reserve  (AFIR)  Program  and  developed  a 
combat  ready  reserve  force  to  support  active  force  intelligence 
operations  during  peacetime  contingencies  or  wartime  mobilization. 
The  division  also  managed  the  Individual  Mobilization  Augmentee  (IMA) 
positions  which  had  been  established  by  the  Major  Commands  (MAJCOMs) 
and  agencies,  validated  by  the  Air  Staff  at  the  Pentagon  (AF/MPM)  and 
transferred  to  AFIS  for  centralized  control.2 
   As  Director  of  the  Intelligence  Reserve  Forces,  Colonel  John 
R.  Oberst  desired  to  meet  the  user  command's  requirements  for  wartime 
augmentation  by  recruitment  of  fully  qualified  personnel  or  prior 
service  personnel  with  intelligence-related  experience.  Recruitment 
and  retention  were  two  goals  used  to  obtain  this  objective. 
Recruitment  initiatives,  to  achieve  a  net  personnel  gain  of  five 
percent  each  fiscal  year  included:  (1)  increased  use  of  existing 
advertising  media;  (2)  ensuring  the  Detached  Training  Sites  (DTSs) 
were  aware  of  current  recruiting  guidelines;  (3)  expanding  recruiting 
of  prior  service  personnel  with  intelligence-related  experience;  and 
(4)  expanding  mailing  to  potential  prospects  identified  through 
Headquarters  Air  Reserve  Personnel  Center  (ARPC)  and  Headquarters  Air 
Force  Reserve  (AFRES)  files.  Retention  initiatives  to  reduce  losses 
from  the  AFIR  program  included:  (1)  identifying  and  tracking  those 
people  due  reenlistment  and  encouraging  their  continued  participation; 
(2)  meaningful  use  of  people  in  greater  numbers  for  substantive 
intelligence  projects  to  provide  proficiency  and  maintain  high  levels 
of  interest;  and  (3)  maximizing  recognition  of  outstanding  performance 
and  significant  contributions  through  awards  and  decorations. 3 
   A  significant  effort  in  support  of  the  mission  during  1932 
involved  an  update  of  the  AFIR  Plan  FY  1982-1986  (began  in  1981).  It 
stressed  initiatives  to  meet  five-year  objectives  and  goals,  and  to 
meet  the  existing  gap  between  command  augmentation  requirements  and 
AFIR  strength.  The  goal  of  the  plan  was  to  reach  a  higher  level  of 
personnel  strength  and  operational  capability  through  three  basic 
objectives.  These  included  employment  of  reservists  in  peacetime 
intelligence  functions  as  an  integral  part  of  maintaining  proficiency
and  mobilization  readiness;  augmentation  of  active  force  intelligence 
operations  in  peacetime  contingencies  or  wartime  mobilization;  and 
achievement  of  full  force  manning  and  full  combat  readiness.4 
■  ft  Colonel  Oberst  believed  that  management  of  a  larger 
intemgence  reserve  force  could  be  achieved  without  sacrificing 
quality.  He  stated:  "The  AFIR  program  is  the  largest  functionally 
managed  Individual  Mobilization  Augmentee  program  in  the  Air  Force 
Reserve  and  we  want  to  maintain  its  reputation  as  the  'best'  through  a 
challenging,  viable,  and  productive  environment. "5 
Organization 
^P  The  Intelligence  Reserve  Fo^ce  Division  (AFIS/RE)  served 
both  as  a  staff  directorate  of  AFIS  and  as  the  management  element  of 
the  AFIR  program.  As  the  AFIS  staff  directorate,  it  continued  to  be 
divided  into  two  major  subdivisions:  Operations  and  Readiness  (REQ) 
and  Personnel  Management  (REP). 6 
(I  ■  The  duties  and  responsibilities  of  the  Operations  and 
Reaamess  Division  included  developing  and  employing  reservists  in  the 
AFIR  program  in  a  wide  variety  of  military  specialities  to  maintain  or 
increase  their  proficiency  and  mobilization  readiness;  coordinating 
intelligence  reserve  support  requirements  of  the  Department  of  Defense 
(DOD),  Headquarters  United  States  Air  Force  (USAF),  Major  Commands 
(MAJCOMS)  and  Unified  and  Specified  Commands;  coordinating  and 
managing  Air  Force  Intelligence  Reserves  in  support  of  active 
intelligence  production  requirements  including  local  and  remote 
tasking  of  Detached  Training  Sites  (DTSs),  and  the  evaluation  of 
products  and  services;  coordinating  DTS  intelligence  briefings  and 
.intelligence-block  training  to  Air  Force  Reserve  (AFRES)  flying  units; 
developing  man-days  requirements,  Reserve  Personnel  Appropriation 
(RPA)  and  Military  Personnel  Appropriation  (MPA),  to  provide  for 
operational,  administrative,  and  training  requirements  for  the  AFIR 
program;  allocating  RPA  man-days  to  fund  special  tours  for  training 
and  support  of  training  of  IMAs  to  maintain  or  increase  proficiency 
and-  mobilization  readiness;  allocating  MPA  man-days  to  fund  special 
tours  in  direct  support  of  active  force  requirements  to  meet  a 
temporary  active  force  manning  need  which  could  not  be  met 
economically  by  active  force  resources;  and  scheduling  annual  tours 
for  IMAs.7 
■B  The  division  also  identified  and  evaluated  formal  courses 
conducted  for  active  duty  personnel  to  determine  applicability  to 
intelligence  reserve  proficiency  upgrading;  developed  criteria  and 
requirements  for  the  establishment  and  conduct  of  specialized  formal 
courses  for  the  AFIR;  selected  reserve  personnel  for  skill  proficiency 
upgrade  and  skill  broadening  courses;  administered  skill  proficiency 
upgrade  actions;  provided  staff  supervision  of  the  foreign  language 
training  program;  developed  training  exercises  for  use  at  AFIS/RE 
DTSs;  evaluated  exercise  learning  outcome;  monitored  documentation  of 
IMA  training  folders;  developed  and  briefed  concepts,  programs  and 
policies  to  insure  that  the  AFIR  program  supported  active  force, 
intelligence  requirements  in  peacetime  and  during  contingencies  as  an
integral  part  of  maintaining  military  proficiency  and  mobilization 
preparedness;  prepared  inputs  to  mobilization  plans  of  the  AFIS. 
Headquarters  USAF,  and  USAF  MAJCOMs;  represented  AFIS  at  DOD, 
Headquarters  USAF,  and  USAF  MAJCOMs;  represented  AFIS  at  000 
Headquarters  USAF,  USAF  MAJCOMs  and  Air  Force  Reserve  conferences 
relating  to  the  development,  use  and  readiness  of  the  AFIR;  prepared 
command  support  agreements  and  memoranda  of  understanding;  organized 
and  coordinated  the  establishment  of  AFIR  DTSs;  provided  guidance  and 
monitored  Host-Tenant  Support  Agreements  between  DTSs  and  host 
installations;  developed  operating  instructions  (OIs)  used  in  the 
directorate  and  the  DTSs;  prepared  analysis  to  evaluate  AFIR  program 
management  methods  and  procedures;  and  performed  staff  assistant 
visits  to  the  DTSs. 8 
^^  The  Personnel  Management  Division  (REP)  developed  and 
maintained  specialized  intelligence  reserve  personnel  data 
encompassing  civilian  and  military  intelligence  background,  technical 
and  linguistic  skills,  and  active  duty  tour  data;  maintained  and 
updated  the  in-house  Automated  Data  Processing  System;  submitted 
inputs  to  the  Consolidated  Reserve  Personnel  Office  (CRPO)  for  update 
of  the  Advanced  Personnel  Data  System  (APDS);  administered  procedures 
for  the  accomplishment  of  intelligence  Reserve  Officer  Effectiveness 
Reports  (OERs)  and  Airman  Performance  Reports  (Reserve)  (APR(R)); 
reviewed  and  processed  all  reports  prior  to  their  becoming  an  official 
record;  developed  and  maintained  intelligence  reserve  retention  and 
recruitment  programs;  evaluated  applicants  for  the  AFIR  program; 
controlled  assignment  and  reassignment  actions;  maintained  master  AFIR 
manning  documents;  and  developed  standards  and  monitored  AFIR  Officer 
Unit  Vacancy  and  Enlisted  Promotion  programs. 9 
M  p  In  addition,  the  division  prepared  and  reviewed  AFIR 
security  clearance  packages,  initiated  requests  for  formal  clearances, 
prepared  security  clearance  status  reports  and  requested  special 
security  billets;  managed  the  AFIR  personnel  affairs  program, 
including  awards  and  decorations,  recognition  and  appreciation 
correspondence,  and  retirements;  maintained  liaison  on  reserve 
personnel  related  matters  with  the  Air  Staff,  Air  Reserve  Personnel 
Center,  USAF  Commands,  USAF  Manpower  Personnel  Center,  and  other 
Separate  Operating  Agencies  (SOAs);  monitored  CRPO  personnel  actions 
on  reservists  assigned  or  attached  to  the  AFIR  program;  monitored 
personnel  related  actions  pertaining  to  a  reservists'  career,  such 
as:  retirements,  good  years,  promotions,  commissioning  programs,  etc.; 
administered  the  Outstanding  IMA'  of  the  Year  and  Deserving  Airman 
Commissioning  programs;  and  conducted  staff  assistance  visits. *0 
The  AFIR  program  consisted  of  two  organizational  elements: 
the  AFIS/RE  staff  and  the  field  organization.  The  field  organization 
continued  to  be  divided  into  seven  geographic  areas  to  facilitate 
field  management  of  Detached  Training  Sites  (DTSs).  Each  area  was 
supervised  by  an  Area  Director  (AD),  assisted  by  an  Area  Operations 
and  Training  Officer  (AOT),  an  Area  Personnel  Officer  (APO),  and  an 
Area  Enlisted  Advisor  (AEA).  All  were  reservists  who  performed  these 
duties  in  addition  to  their  primary  responsibility  of  maintaining
mobilization  readiness.  The  AO  (a  Colonel  0-5)  ensured  that  OTSs  were 
managed  in  accordance  with  the  procedures  established  by  AFIS/RE.  The 
AOT  and  APO  (drawn  from  grades  Captain  through  Lieutenant  Colonel  0-3 
to  0-5)  were  the  principal  action  officers  for  training  and 
operations,  personnel  requirements,  and  policy  matters.  The  AEA  was 
the  principal  advisor  in  matters  concerning  enlisted  personnel, 
administration,  and  security. H 
fjk  The  OTSs  were  informal  administrative  entities  which  trained 
ea  reservists  in  a  common  geographic  area.  They  were  managed  by 
a  small  staff  of  reservists  who,  in  addition  to  meeting  training 
requirements,  served  in  additional  duty  roles  such  as  commander, 
operations  and  training  officer,  and  personnel  officer.  They  were 
normally  located  at  Air  Force  installations  and  provided  intelligence 
support  to  collocated  active  and  reserve  units.  They  also  worked  on 
intelligence  projects  from  other  organizations  using  the  special 
skills  available  within  the  DTSs.12 
i|  A  remote  flight  was  established  as  a  geographically  separate 
subelement  of  a  DTS  when  it  had  been  determined  that  a  valid  training 
opportunity  existed.  The  Board  of  Advisors  (80A)  was  an  additional 
duty  committee  comprised  of  senior  members  who  had  experience  as  ADs, 
DTS  commanders,  or  in  key  enlisted  positions.  The  members  of  the  BOA, 
individually  and  collectively,  advised  the  Director  of  AFIS/RE  on 
policies  and  other  areas  of  importance  to  the  program.  They  reported 
to  and  were  tasked  by  the  director. 13  * 
Budget 
#|^  A  significant  portion  of  the  AFIS/RE  budget  provided  for 
travel  In  connection  with  operational  and  mission  support  visits  to 
the  reserve  DTSs.  These  visits  provided  the  only  effective  means  of 
providing  on-site  direction  and  guidance  from  the  RE  staff  on  DTS 
operational  support  projects  and  training.  Travel  to  Area  Directors 
Workshops  provided  policy,  guidance  and  direction  to  the  key  members 
of  the  AFIR  program. 14 
The  largest  budget  expenditure  involved  communications  — 
primarily  for  the  usage  of  WATS  telephone  lines.  The  management  of 
reservists  required  contacting  them  either  at  places  of  employment  or 
at  home.  Operation  of  the  WATS  lines  also  afforded  the  reservists  the 
opportunity  to  contact  the  RE  staff  at  no  expense.  These  lines 
remained  vital  to  effective  operation  and  management  of  the  AFIR 
program. 15 
*  The  AFIR  Factbook  contains  additional  organizational 
information.  It  provided  the  AFIS  Commander,  key  staff  personnel,  and 
major  active  force  user  agencies  with  information  on  significant 
management  areas  of  the  AFIR  program.  The  Factbook  was  published 
twice  each  fiscal  year  in  October  and  April  (See  SD167).  The  AFIR 
Handbook  was  updated  in  April.  It  describes  the  AFIR  program,  the 
functions  of  AFIS/RE,  and  the  procedures  involved  with  requesting  AFIR 
support  and  user  participation  and  contribution  (See  SD168).
^^  Table  3-1  provides  a  summary  of  total  RE  expenditures  for 
19827""0verall,  only  a  minimal  increase  over  the  Fiscal  Year  (FY)  82 
budget  allocation  occurred.  In  general,  two  major  adjustments  were 
made:  rental  equipment  was  reduced  by  $10,000  due  to  the  purchase  of 
the  Xerox  860  word  processing  system  during  FY82;  and  the  budget  for 
communications  increased  by  S9,000  due  to  increased  use  of  the  WATS 
telephone  lines. 16 
TABLE  3-1 
SUMMARY  OF  RE  EXPENDITURES 
CATEGORY  TOTAL  EXPENSE 
Travel  of  Personnel  on  TOY  $27,000 
Equipment  Rental  (IBM  Copier,  3M  Remote  Copier)  9,100 
Communications  (WATS  Line)  35,000 
Other  Supplies  and  Administration  Supplies  9,000 
Equipment  and  New  Equipment  2,000 
Purchase  Maintenance  Equipment  1,400 
Total  $83,500 
OPERATIONS  ANO  READINESS 
Annual  and  Special  Tours 
ft 
eouTed 
^^  The  Operations  Branch  (AFIS/REOO)  resource  managers 
scheduled  over  2200  annual  and  special  tours  --  an  increase  of  34 
percent  over  1981.  The  20,268  man-days  committed  for  these  tours 
equated  to  over  55^  man-years  of  active  force  support.  The  branch 
also  provided  support  to  overseas  exercises  including  Team  Spirit, 
Ulchi  Focus  Lens,  Flintlock,  and  Reforger  and  in  the  Continental 
United  States  (CONUS)  to  Red  Flag,  Blue  Flag,  Vigilant  Overview,  and 
Gallant  Knight. *7 
    A  new  program  started  by  AFIS/RE  during  the  year  involved 
the  on-station  tour  program  for  Defense  Attache  Reserve  officers. 
Throughout  1982,  officers  were  sent  to  Defense  Attache  Offices  (DAOs) 
at  Santiago,  Chile;  Tunis,  Tunisia;  Bohn,  Germany;  and  Madrid,  Spain. 
Appendix  XI  contains  a  synopsis  of  support  provided  to  each  Mobilization 
Day  (M-Day)  command  during  1982. 18 
   On  1  October,  the  Operations  Branch  assumed  responsibility 
for  publication  of  tour  orders  for  Military  Appropriation  (MPA)  tours. 
This  function  had  been  previously  accomplished  by  the  ARPC  in  Denver, 
Colorado.  The  necessary  coordination  was  accomplished  in  minimal  time 
and  the  first  32  MPA  tour  orders  were  locally  published  in  the  final 
quarter  of  the  year. 19 
(£  Due  to  fiscal  constraints  and  RE  directive,  annual  tours  to 
overseas  MAJCOMs  remained  limited,  Procedural  changes  were  in  effect 
to  provide  the  maximum  training  benefit  from  the  limited  number  of 
tours  available. 20
_  Proper  man-day  use  was  part  of  RE's  management 
responsibility.  Therefore,  man-days  were  closely  monitored  to  ensure 
qualified  reservists  were  identified  in  response  to  MAJCOM  requests. 
To  maintain  reasonable  equity  among  available  and  qualified 
reservists,  the  MAJCOK  and  SOA  users  were  informed  that  "by-name" 
requests  would  continue  to  be  accommodated;  however,  an  alternate 
reservist  with  similar  qualifications  might  be  suggested  as  a 
substitute  for  a  by-name  request. 21 
^    Exercise  participation  by  the  reservists  continued  to  be 
encouraged  and  solicited  since  it  provided  an  excellent  training 
environment.  Since  most  active  force  exercise  dates  were  classified 
until  released  by  the  exercise  office  of  primary  responsibility  (OPR), 
available  dates  provided  by  the  reservists  often  did  not  coincide  with 
exercise  dates.  Procedures  were  established  to  provide  the  fullest 
exercise  participation  possible. 22 
£B   Besides  exercise  participation,  common  training  weekends 
were" designated  twice  each  year.   During  these  sessions,  the  DTSs  met 
to  conduct  Inactive  Duty  Training  (IDT).  The  AFIS/RE  staff  remained 
available  to  provide  continuity  and  direction. 23 
Workshops 
^p  One  joint  and  four  Area  Director-DTS  Commander  workshops 
were  held  during  the  year.  These  included:  the  National  Capital 
Area,  Fort  Belvoir,  Virginia,  13-14  March;  the  Pacific  and  Western 
Areas,  Nellis  AFB,  Nevada,  20-21  March;  the  Central  Area,  Offutt  AFB, 
Nebraska,  23-25  April;  the  Southwest  Area,  MacDill  AFB,  Florida,  15-16 
May;   and  the  Southwest  Area,  Kirtland  AFB,  New  Mexico,  25-26 
September. 24 
flp  These  workshops,  chaired  by  the  respective  area  directors 
(ADs^^provided  a  forum  for  DTS  commanders  to  review  areas  of 
management,  operations  and  personnel  with  an  objective  to  further 
refine  and  improve  the  existing  AFIR  program.  The  Director, 
Intelligence  Reserve  Forces,  Deputy  Director,  and  other  staff  members, 
together  with  Major  General  Walter  R.  Longanecker,  Jr.  and  Brigadier 
General  Arthur  W.  Green,  Jr.  (both  Mobilization  Assistants  to  the 
Assistant  Chief  of  Staff,  Intelligence)  attended  these  workshops. 
They  presented  new  developments,  policy,  future  concepts,  and  the  AFIR 
program  briefing.  Two  additional  workshops  took  place  at  Fort  Belvoir 
—  an  Area  Operations  and  Training  (AOT)  Officers  workshop  on  6-7 
March  and  the  annual  Area  Director's  workshop  on  11-12  September.  All 
members  agreed  that  the  free  exchange  of  issues,  information,  and 
ideas  and  the  receptiveness  of  the  attendees  contributed  significantly 
to  the  value  and  productiveness  of  these  workshops. 25 
Mobilization  Planning  and  Readiness 
fP  The  Readiness  Branch  and  Programs  Section  (AFIS/REOR) 
provided  significant  inputs  and  coordination  on  the  AFIS  Support  Plan 
—  SPACECOM.  This  plan  outlined  the  deployment  and  employment  of 
Individual  Mobilization  Aug-nentees  (IMAs)  to  their  M-Day  assignments
with  Space  Command  and  provided  guidance  and  procedures  for  deploying 
active  and  reserve  AFIR  personnel  to  support  the  command  in  general 
war  and  other  contingencies.  It  outlined  the  intelligence  Essential 
Elements  of  Information  (EEIs),  IMA  deployment  phases  by  Unit  Type 
Code  (UTC),  logistic  essentials  (i.e.  transportation,  personal 
equipment,  etc.),  alert  and  recall  procedures,  and  personnel 
processing. 26 
flfe  Similar  inputs  were  also  provided  to  the  AFIS  Concept  Plan  - 
-Development  of  CONUS  Sustaining  Support  Forces  for  AFIS  during 
contingencies  and  general  war  (AFIS  CONPLAN-AFIS  Support).  This  plan 
also  provided  guidance  for  reserve  augmentation  to  Headquarters  AFIS 
and  the  Air  Force  Special  Activities  Center  (AFSAC)  located  at  Fort 
Belvoir.27 
MJk  During  1982,  RE  started  a  project  (as  part  of  the  AFIR 
progr&nj  on  mobilization  readiness.  It  began  with  a  letter  to 
subordinate  units  outlining  RE's  intentions  and  goals  in  broad  terms. 
Under  this  project,  AD  and  RE  staff  members  conducted  field  readiness 
assessments  of  the  IMAs.  DTSs  were  given  references  to  assist  them  in 
understanding  their  responsibilities.  The  impact  of  this  year  long 
initiative  was  an  improvement  in  the  AFIR  mobilization  readiness 
posture  of  the  IMAs.  It  resulted  in  better  M-Day  preparation  and 
knowledge,  better  understanding  by  the  DTSs  of  their  responsibilities 
in  assisting  the  IMAs  to  be  ready  for  mobilization,  and  more  emphasis 
by  the  Area  Director  staffs  on  readiness  related  items  during  their 
staff  assistance  visits.28 
^^  As  a  result  of  this  project,  the  IMAs  performance  during 
19S2s  major  mobilization  exercise  (Exercise  Proud  Saber  83)  improved 
significantly  over  the  previous  year's  exercise  (Condor  Redoubt  81). 
Exercise  Proud  Saber  83,  conducted  from  25  October  to  5  November, 
evaluated  the  readiness  and  responsiveness  of  the  Air  Force  Reserve  to 
properly  react  to  mobilization  tasking  in  time  of  national  emergency. 
The  RE  staff  and  assigned  IMAs  participation  in  Proud  Saber  83 
primarily  involved  three  areas:  telephone  alert,  transportation 
processing  and  final  in-processing. 29 
^^  AFIS/RE  began  the  AFIR-wide  telephone  alert  on  18  October 
and  continued  contact  efforts  for  two  days.  This  included  the  first 
mobilisation  test  of  the  overseas  assigned  IMAs.  Procedures  were 
established  with  four  overseas  command  Indications  and  Warning  Centers 
to  pass  information  to  the  DTS  commanders.  The  total  response  was  92 
percent  —  a  significant  improvement  over  last  year's  rate  of  86 
percent  for  Condor  Redoubt  81. 3^ 
■I  A  total  of  nine  IMAs  from  DTS  11  processed  through  Andrews 
AFB,  Maryland,  Transportation  Management  Office  (TMO)  for  various 
simulated  CONUS  and  overseas  assignments.  Four  IMAs  had  mailgram 
orders  and  five  did  not.  As  long  as  the  IMA  was  aware  of  the  theater 
or  base  being  deployed  to,  the  TMO  had  no  problem  issuing  a 
transportation  request  (TR)  and  moving  the  IMA  based  upon  a  verbal 
order  of  the  commander  and  his  reserve  identification  card,  even  if 
the  IMA  did  not  have  a  wricten  order. 31
7E 
4k  fk  A  total  of  eight  IMAs  in-processed  at  Boiling  AFB,  D.C. 
Consolidated  Base  Personnel  Office  (CBPO)  with  four  having  mailgrams 
and  four  with  nothing  more  than  their  ARPC  mobility  kit  and  guide. 
After  some  initial  confusion,  the  in-processing  progressed  smoothly 
and  was  completed  within  approximately  three  hours.  A  significant 
lesson  learned  from  this  portion  of  the  exercise  was  the  benefit  to 
the  IMA  of  having  a  mobility  kit  in  hand  and  the  appropriate  forms 
completed  --it  saved  time  and  effort. 32 
^m^  Responsibilities  for  the  Air  Force  IMA  program  were  outlined 
in  a*"new  regulation,  AFR  35-34  (Individual  Mobilization  Augmentee 
Program).  It  provided  an  informative  document  to  all  levels  of 
management  and  those  personnel  involved  with  the  IMA  program.33 
4B  Finally,  RE  productivity  goals  were  identified  for  input 
into^ne  AFIS  Productivity  Plan.  These  goals  were  presented  and 
initiatives  were  designed  to  achieve  them.  The  goals  were:  increased 
manning  in  the  AFIR,  reduced  officer  efficiency  report  (OER)  late 
rates,  and  involvement  of  all  IMAs  in  intelligence  production  relating 
to  their  M-Day  Air  Force  Specialty  Code  (AFSC)  positions.34 
Establishment  of  Detached  Training  Sites 
^IB  The  DTSs  and  remote  flights  were  established  by  Colonel 
Oberst  after  the  Area  Director  had  determined  that  a  valid  training 
opportunity  existed  to  support  IMAs  in  a  common  geographical  area  an 
had  coordinated  on  tenant  support  with  the  host  base.  The  year  saw  a 
significant  increase  in  the  informal  organizational  structure  with  thf. 
establishment  of  two  new  DTSs  and  three  flights.  These  additions  gay 
the  AFIR  program  its  largest  organization  on  record  and  reflected  thr 
most  IMAs  ever  in  the  AFIR  program.  As  of  31  December,  there  were  <Y: 
DTSs  and  eight  flights.  Table  3-2  provides  a  list  of  new  trainino 
locations  established  in  1962. 35 
TABLE  3-2 
NE»  TRAINING  LOCATIONS 
DATE 
TITLE     ESTABLISHED       LOCATION  PURPOSE 
DTS47    1  Sep  82         Ft  Belvoir,  VA    Evolved  from  DTS  21 
whose  strength  had 
become  too  large  to 
manage  effectively. 
DTS  47  provided 
support  to  AFSAC  and 
the  training  of  IMAs 
in  Human  Intel 
(HUMINT).
DTS48     16  Dec  82 
Sunnyvale  AFS,  CA 
Fit  5B    18  Sep  82 
Portland 
national 
OR 
Inter- 
Arpt, 
Fit  14B   i  Aug  82 
Dallas  Naval 
Station,  TX 
Air 
Fit  23B   1  Oct  32 
Berlin,  Federal 
Republic  of 
Germany 
Provided  scientific 
and  technical  intel 
support  to  DIA  and 
Foreign  Tech  Di  v  (FTD) 
activities,  and 
locally  to  DOD  high- 
technology  environment 
in  the  San  Francisco 
Bay  area. 
Supported  the 
304  Aerospace  Rescue 
and  Recovery  Squadron 
(AFRES) 
Supported  the  Naval 
Reserve  Area  Coord- 
inator  and  the  Intel 
Center  Pacific  (IPAC). 
Supported  the  Joint 
Allied  Refugee  Oper- 
tion  Center  (OAROC). 
atH^hn 
      Other    locations   considered   as   potential    host   bases   for   the 
establishment  of  a  DTS  or  flight  during  the  year  included  Patrick  AFB, 
Florida  and  Royal  Air  Force  (RAF)  Lakenheath,  United  Kingdom.  A  final 
change  to  DTS  locations  involved  the  redesignation  of  DTS  36  at 
Barksdale  AFB,  Louisiana  as  Flight  14A.  Low  personnel  strength  had 
hindered  the  former  DTS  from  discharging  its  responsibilities. 
Consequently,  the  reorganization  was  mutually  agreed  upon  by  Colonel 
Oberst  and  the  DTS  commander. 36 
Intelligence  Support  Projects 
:a^Ty  a 
The  Readiness  Branch  DTS  Projects  section  monitored  over  300 
local  iy  and  remotely  tasked  DTS  intelligence  projects  in  support  .of  30 
MAJCOMs,  SOAs,  Agencies,  Air  National  Guard  (ANG),  Navy,  and  Joint 
Commands.  These  projects  were  used  as  a  medium  for  providing  both 
proficiency  training  to  the  IMAs  and  intelligence  support  to  active 
force  and  reserve  force  users. 37 
UB  Management  of  the  DTS  projects  was  primarily  accomplished 
througn  the  training  weekend  reports  submitted  to  each  DTS.  The 
report  data  included  project  numbers,  project  descriptions,  tasking 
organizations,  estimated  completion  dates,  time  devoted  to  projects  by 
each  IMA  and  their  Air  Force  Specialty  Code  (AFSC).  The  data  was 
compared  with  previously  submitted  data,  and  was  analyzed  in  terms  of 
viability  of  training  value,  and  on-going  status.  Questions  that 
occurred  on  the  utility  or  data  of  the  projects  were  quickly  resolved. 
Management  of  these  projects  was  also  accomplished  through  staff 
assistance  visits  to  the  DTSs  by  the  various  Area  Directors  staffs  and 
the  RE  staff. 38
^_  Several  significant  actions  were  started  during  the  year. 
The  principal  action  involved  a  letter  to  all  user  commands  points-of- 
contact  associated  with  the  AFIR  program  soliciting  their  support  for 
intelligence  projects  on  behalf  of  the  IMAs.  Their  assistance  was 
requested  to  identify  intelligence  projects  that  would  be  useful  to 
the  accomplishment  of  their  mission  and  also  provide  productive 
training  to  the  IMAs.  Response  from  the  major  commands  and  the  other 
agencies  was  enthusiastic  as  more  than  150  projects  were  received. 
This  provided  a  viable  indication  of  their  support  of  the  AFIR 
program.  Specific  OTSs  were  identified  to  work  on  selected 
projects. 39 
4B  Emphasis  was  also  placed  on  IMA  Inactive  Duty  Training  (IDT) 
at  theDTSs.  This  was  done  as  a  result  of  discussions  with  the  Air 
Force  Auditor  who  expressed  concern  (from  field  auditors'  reports) 
indicating  a  lack  of  awareness  on  the  part  of  IMAs  concerning  the 
relationship  of  IDT  to  M-Day  skill  proficiency  requirements.  The  ADs, 
AOTs,  and  DTS  commanders  were  requested  to  educate  DTS  personnel  in 
this  area.  The  DTS  projects  section  placed  additional  emphasis  on 
Duty  AFSC  (DAFSC)  project  matching  in  assigning  DTS  projects,  and 
monitored  it  when  examining  training  reports  to  insure  assigned  IMAs' 
DAFSCs  remained  compatible  with  projects.40 
(p  An  initial  distribution  of  materials  was  made  available  to 
the  DTSs  on  behalf  of  the  United  States  Air  Force  in  Europe  (USAFE) 
IMA  self-study  program.  This  program  made  orientation  materials 
available  to  USAFE  IMAs  that  would  benefit  them  in  their  M-Day 
position. 41 
^JB  Updated  imagery  interpretation  packages  were  also 
distributed  to  DTSs  with  imagery  interpretation  specialists  provided 
by  the  497th  Reconnaissance  Technical  Group  (RTG)  (USAFE).  This  was  a 
follow-on  distribution  to  one  made  in  1981  in  response  to  an  AFIS/RE 
request  for  assistance  in  providing  training  materials  to  the  IMA 
imagery  interpreters.  The  497th  RTG  remained  very  supportive  to  the 
AFIR  program. *2 
Another  initiative  involved  an  increase  in  IMA  productivity 
during  IDT.  Since  projects  were  the  primary  means  of  achieving  and 
maintaining  AFSC  proficiency,  the  level  of  productivity  of  IDT  needed 
to  be  maximized  in  order  to  obtain  the  greatest  benefit  to  the  IMA  and 
the  M-Day  command.  Ideally,  IMAs  needed  to  be  involved  in  projects 
related  to  their  M-Day  DAFSC  position.  Monitoring  the  training 
reports  disclosed  the  amount  of-  time  spent  on  projects.  The  DTS 
project  statistics  were  gathered  and  evaluated.  Those  DTSs  with  a  low 
rate  of  man-hours  per  project  were  identified  and  notified.  Awareness 
by  DTS  commanders  (of  the  need  to  focus  interest  in  this  area)  had  a 
positive  affect  on  this  initiative. 43 
During  19S2,  two  DTS  generated  project  proposals  were  worthy 
of  note.  First,  DTS  35  had  advocated  the  establishment  of  an  in-place 
reserve  capability  for  maintaining  and  updating  Cuban  threat  data.   It
would  be  used  to  provide  intelligence  support  to  Air  Force  flying 
units  within  72  hours  of  a  Cuban  contingency.  Secondly,  DTS  45 
proposed  the  formation  of  a  Soviet  Awareness  Briefing  Team  to  brief  to 
Air  Force  reserve  units  on  the  Soviet  threat.  This  proposal  required 
coordination  with  Headquarters  Air  Force  Reserve  (AFRES)  and  the 
Director  of  Soviet  Affairs  (AFIS/INC).  44 
Training  Programs 
   The  AFIS/RE  Readiness  Branch  training  section  managed  in- 
resident  training  of  over  252  reserve  officers  and  airmen  during  the 
year.  By  the  end  of  the  year,  there  were  183  priority  one  trainees 
(IMAs  requiring  in-residence  courses  for  upgrade).  Through  special 
efforts  in  obtaining  quotas,  AFIR  IMAs  (for  the  first  time)  attended 
such  unique  schools  as  the  Administrative  Systems  Course  (E3AZR70270- 
1)  held  at  Keesler  AFB,  Mississippi  and  the  Advanced  Security  Police 
Officer  Course  (L30AR8111-000)  held  at  Lackland  AFB,  Texas.45   " 
^_  Three  sessions  of  the  Intelligence  Targeting  Officer 
training  program  were  held  at  Lowry  AFB,  Colorado.  Six  officers 
completed  the  Target  Analysis  Session  and  nine  attended  the  Advanced 
Weaponeering  Session.  Six  targeting  officers  attended  the  Force 
Applications  and  Mission  Folders  Session  and  thereby,  were  the  first 
class  to  complete  the  Targeting  Officer  Training  program.  This  was 
the  first  class  to  finish  the  three  phase  program.  Other  reserve 
members  also  attended  the  Basic  Interrogation  Course  and  the  Advanced 
Interrogation  Course  (Exercise)  held  at  Los  Alamitos  Armed  Forces 
Reserve  Center  in  California.40 
    As  indicated  earlier,  an  Area  Operations  and  Training  (AOT) 
officer  workshop  was  held  at  Fort  Belvoir  on  5-7  March.  The  workshop 
provided  a  forum  for  the  seven  AOTs  and  AFIS/RE  staff  members  to 
discuss  common  areas  of  concern  regarding  DTS  training  and  operations. 
Problems  were  identified  and  acceptable  solutions  derived  in  the 
following  areas:  training  priorities,  schools,  enlisted  retraining 
policy,  on-the-job  (OJT)  upgrades,  projects  and  proficiency 
maintenance,  Human  Intelligence  (HUMINT),  foreign  language  training, 
weight  control,  and  mobilization  readiness  training.  The  result  was  a 
compilation  of  problem  areas  which  the  participants  agreed  to  address 
and  resolve  during  the  remainder  of  the  year.4? 
fl)  An  ad  hoc  working  group,  created  in  the  fall  of  1981  to 
formalize  retraining  guidance,  completed  its  study  in  March.  The 
working  group,  composed  of  AFIS/RE  enlisted  personnel,  used  its  long 
training  experience  to  formulate  guidance  and  procedures  regarding 
retraining  and  renlisted  recruiting  policy.  The  guidance  was  tailored 
to  meet  specific  AFIR  needs  while  remaining  in  concert  with  Air  Force 
regulations.  Another  result  was  the  establishment  of  an  enlisted 
applications  review  panel  which  made  recommendations  of  prospective 
enlisted  applicants  to  the  AFIS/RE  Applications  Review  Board.48 
■B  In  August,  the  Air  Force  Intelligence  Planning  Division 
(AF/INYX)  notified  AFIS/RE  that  Air  Force  Regulation  (AFR)  36-2
(Officer  Classification  Regulation)  was  being  revised.  In  response. 
Colonel  Oberst  reviewed  the  draft  proposal  and  identified  three 
problem  areas:  (1)  training  requirements  listed  in  the  revision 
should  apply  only  to  officers  entering  80XX  AFSCs  on  or  after  the 
effective  date  of  implementation.  Officers  already  assigned  to  AFIR 
and  those  assigned  before  implementation  should  be  exempt  from  the 
revision;  (2)  AFIS/RE  footnotes  under  each  job  description  reflected 
specific  comments  regarding  AFIR  officer  training  requirements;  and 
(3)  formal  training  certification  of  each  specialty  description 
already  existed  with  the  AFIS  training  structure  in  the  form  of  a 
■andatory  upgrade  board  held  prior  to  upgrade  action. W 
?^>s&£mr 
t 
A»  .*-■■«-' 
jfiv 
I 
J* 
•*«£5» 
5ft-^i</»Ssi.'ii.-- 
:^JV^    4*~?.'^' 
^:v 
'■Wei*  ■  *■,>-.;•  .-.■-'.'i.'  <^t 
  ,s_ ..      .     i^^e;C;>:^^«;>Eis;^^^^ 
■#& 
KK 
• A  new  foreign  language  program  also  started  in  1982.  The 
OTS  ^4~,  charged  with  program  management,  hosted  a  reserve  team 
leaders*  workshop  at  Monterey,  California  on  6-7  November.  The 
purpose  of  the  workshop  was  to  evaluate  the  three  weekends  of  total 
immersion  language  training  conducted  in  1982.  Team  leader 
presentations  revealed  a  common  denominator:  tremendous  enthusiasm, 
initiative,  and  progress.  Key  features  of  total  immersion  training 
were  innovating  methods  --  the  "no  english"  rule,  and  the  "do  with 
what  you  have"  approach.  These  features  generated  high  motivation  to 
succeed  in  a  unique  experiment.  Specific  examples  were  given  to 
describe  increasing  proficiency.  Although  only  three  weekend  sessions 
were  held  during  theyear,  Colonel  Oberst  believed  the  experience  held 
promise  of  success. ^ 
O 
P 
a 
a> 
6)
The  ultimate  objective  of  the  foreign  language  program  was 
to  produce  conversational  fluency  in  foreign  languages  specified  by 
commands  and  agencies  affiliated  with  the  AFIR  program.  Colonel 
Oberst  stated:  "The  total  immersion  experiment  has  already  exceeded 
our  expectations.  It  has  'caught  fire'  because  of  the  great  enthusiam 
and  initiative  of  participants."  Likewise,  the  two  week  tutorial 
training  at  the  Defense  Language  Institute  for  linguists  who  could  not 
participate  in  teams  because  of  their  remote  locations  received  high 
marks  from  attendees.  Without  reservation,  team  leaders  applauded 
AFIS/RE  for  the  efficient  processing  of  man-day  tour  orders  and  for 
supporting  training  site  selections.  The  workshop  report  was  reviewed 
by  General  Bissell  who  commented:  "....excited  by  the  interest  and 
enthusiasm.... believe  we  will  need  considerable  patience  and 
perserverance;  but  objectives  are  worthwhile  and  should  be  continued 
for  two  to  three  years  and  then  evaluated. "54 
flP  The  Air  Force  initiative  "Project  Warrior"  was  introduced  to 
the  DTSs  to  generate  suggestions  and  products.  The  basic  goal  of  the 
project  was  to  reinforce  military  professionalism.  Within  the  Air 
Force  intelligence  community,  this  was  accomplished  through  study, 
research  and  emphasis  on  the  special  role  of  intelligence  in  air 
power.  Colonel  Oberst  hoped  that  lessons  learned  from  failures  and 
successes  would  result  in  more  effective  use  of  intelligence  and  its 
potential  for  maintaining  peace.  Response  from  the  field  units  was 
good  with  several  promising  inputs  coordinated  with  the  Air  Staff 
(AF/INYX)  project  director. 55 
PERSONNEL  MANAGEMENT 
Assignments  and  Recruiting 
_  The  RE  Manning  Branch  (AFIS/REPM)  continued  to  keep  IMAs  and 
MAOCOMs  apprised  of  changes  in  M-Day  assignments  due  to  promotions, 
command  realignments,  and  quality  reviews  designed  to  better  align 
individual  backgrounds  and  command  requirements  (particularly  language 
experience). 56 
    By  the  end  of  the  year,  314  applications  for  assignment  or 
attachment  to  the  AFIR  Program  were  received.  Of  the  221  applications 
approved,  33  were  pending  publication  of  orders  by  Headquarters  Air 
Reserve  Personnel  Center  (ARPC)  or  other  agencies;  nine  were  pending 
additional  information  in  order  to  accurately  request  orders;  and  nine 
were  placed  on  an  RE  waiting  list.   The  remaining  applications  were 
returned  with  recommendations  of  other  possible  reserve  placement.  As 
a  result  of  a  1980  policy  change  permitting  the  acceptance  of 
individuals  with  less  than  a  "fully  qualified"  background,  the  manning 
strength  of  the  AFIR  Program  significantly  increased.  A  total  gain  of 
187  personnel  (110  officers,  77  enlisted)  and  a  culminate  loss  of  151 
personnel  (74  officers,  77  enlisted)  resulted  in  a  net  gain  of   36 
people. 57
__   As  of  31  December,  AFIS/RE  managed  1265  reservists:   1216 
assigned  and  49  attached  for  training.  This  represented  65  percent  of 
the  authorized  strength  (79  percent  officer  and  41  percent  enlisted) 
of  the  total  1899  positions.   During  1982,  AFIS/RE  lost  26  and  gained 
20  IMA  authorizations.   These  statistics  included  a  loss  of  18  from 
AFIS  and  AFSAC;  eight  from  DALM;  and  a  gain  of  20  for  Tactical  Air 
Command  f TAC ) .  Table  3-3  provides  a  summary  of  IMA  authorizations  by 
command. 58 
TABLE  3-3 
IMA  AUTHORIZATION  SUMMARY 
COMMAND 
TOTAL 
AAC 
USAFE 
239 
ADCOK 
AFIS 
206 
AFLC 
DIA 
261 
MAC 
244 
COMMAND 
TOTAL 
SAC 
164 
AF/IN 
TAC 
138 
PACAF 
436 
DALM 
AFRES 
Several  significant  recruiting  initiatives  were  started 
during  the  year.  A  draft  of  a  brochure  on  the  AFIR  Program  was 
developed  and  submitted  to  Headquarters  Air  Force  Reserve  for  their 
assistance  in  production.  Also,  a  recurring  advertisement  appeared 
in  the  Air  Reservist  Magazine.  This  recruiting  effort  proved  to  be 
very  effective  by  providing  55  percent  of  the  applicants.  A  special 
personnel  listing  from  Headquarters  ARPC  contained  individuals  with 
backgrounds  in  the  intelligence  field.  A  good  response  was  received 
from  the  mailing  of  information  to  more  than  200  persons  on  the  list. 
Reservists  in  the  program  demonstrated  their  own  recruiting  initiative 
by-  advertising  in  local  newspapers,  pamphlets,  and  other 
publications. 59 
Personnel  Security 
^^  The  Security  Branch  (AFIS/REPS)  processed  145  Special 
BackgTound  Investigations  (SBIs).  This  represented  a  36  percent 
decrease  from  the  previous  year»,  primarily  due  to  a  moratorium  on 
bring-up  investigations  by  the  Office  of  the  Secretary  of  Defense. 
However,  in  December,  the  moratorium  was  lifted.  A  total  of  294 
Period  Investigations  (PRs)  were  started  to  clear  up  the  backlog  of 
SBIs  and  PRs. 60 
The  branch  assumed  control  of  two  other  continuing  programs 
during~the  year—Sensitive  Compartmented  Information  (SCI)  biennial 
reindoctrinations  and  waivers  to  SCI  standards.  In  February,  the 
reindoctrination  program  started.   It  consisted  of  determining  the
initial  indoctrination  dates  for  all  SCI  permanently  indoctrinated 
reservists;  incorporating  the  data  into  the  Intelligence  Reserve 
Information  System  (IRIS);  and  then  determining  who  required  biennial 
reindoctrination.  The  reindoctrinations  were  conducted  in  two  ways: 
either  by  the  host  Special  Security  Office  (SSO)  or  by  the  tour 
location  SSO  when  an  active  duty  tour  required  SCI  access. ^ 
M%  The  SCI  waiver  program  began  in  December.  Like  the 
reindoctrination  program,  it  also  contained  three  phases.  First, 
reservists  were  screened  for  ineligibility  because  an  immediate  family 
member  was  a  foreign  national.  The  second  phase  determined  those 
reservists  in  IMA  positions  who  required  SCI  access  upon  mobilization. 
Then,  as  necessary,  obtaining  a  "Statement  of  Intent"  from  the 
immediate  family  member  and  or  requesting  the  IMAs  gaining  command  to 
submit  a  compelling  need  to  the  Security  and  Communications  Management 
Directorate  (AFIS/INS).  This  program  applied  whenever  an  assigned 
reservist  was  reassigned  within  the  AFIR  Program  and  to  other 
applicants  meeting  SCI  waiver  criteria. 62 
^^  The  AFIS/RE  Reserve  SCI  Billet  structure  underwent  several 
changes  during  the  year.  First,  the  Foreign  Technology  Division 
(FTD)  assumed  control  of  all  SCI  and  security  actions  for  FTD 
reservists  attached  to  AFIS/RE  for  training.  A  total  of  40  SCI 
billets  were  transferred  to  FTD.  Second,  two  new  SCI  structures  were 
established:  OTS  27,  to  support  the  18th  Airborne  Corps  at  Fort 
Bragg,  North  Carolina;  and  Flight  37A,  to  support  the  1550  ATTW  at 
Kirtland  AFB,  New  Mexico.  Conversely,  billet  structures  were  deleted 
at  DTS  1,  DTS  24,  and  Flight  25A,  because  reservists  did  not  require 
permanent  SCI  access  to  conduct  Inactive  Duty  Training.  Finally,  in 
December,  the  host  active  duty  Senior  Intelligence  Officer  (SIO)  at 
each  DTS  location  using  SCI  permanent  access  was  requested  to 
revalidate  the  need  for  SCI  billets  and  reservists  indoctrinated  in 
those  billets.  Initial  results  indicated  more  use  of  available 
billets.63 
   Major  changes  to  personnel  security  were  made  in  the  revised 
DOD  5200.2-R/AFR  205-32,  Personnel  Security  Program.  This  required  a 
change  to  the  Memorandum  of  Understanding  (MOU)  between  AFIS/INS  and 
AFIS/RE,  and  a  complete  revision  of  AFIS/RE  Operating  Instruction  (01) 
205-3,  Personnel  Security  Program.  Drafts,  incorporating  the  changes, 
were  approved  by  AFIS/INS  and  the  updated  documents  were  scheduled  to 
be  completed  in  early  1983. &4 
Special  Actions  and  Records 
  r        The  Quality  Force  Branch  (AFIS/REPQ)  continued  to  be 
responsible  for  all  special  actions  and  records  maintenance  functions. 
The  Special  Actions  Section  remained  responsible  for  the  operation, 
management,  and  control  of  Officer  Effectiveness  Reports  (OERs)  and 
Reserve  Airman  Performance  Reports  (APR(R)s),  reserve  officer  and 
enlisted  promotions,  awards  and  decorations,  special  trophies  and 
awards  (Outstanding  Officer  and  Enlisted  Individual  Mobilization 
Augmentees  (IMAs)),  the  Deserving  Airman  Commissioning  Program  (DACP),
and  other  special  programs  a^C  projects  directed  by  the  Chief, 
Personnel  Manaqe^ent  Division. 6^ 
uauo 
A  total  of  901  OERs,  259  APR(R)s,  and  1323  Letters  of 
Evaluation  (LOEs)  we-e  processed.  Although  many  performance  reports 
received  from  the  OTS  reauired  reaccomplishment  or  correction,  they 
were  reaccomplished  virtually  error-free  and  resulted  in  a  final 
acceptance  rate  of  better  than  99  percent.  This  was  especially 
significant  considering  that  the  55  DTSs  and  Flights  were  dispersed 
throughout  the  CONUS,  Europe,  Panama,  Hawaii,  and  Alaska. 66 
fl^  The  AFIS/RE  19B2  Outstanding  Officer  and  Enlisted  IMA  of  the 
Year  screening  Board  convened  on  29  November  and  evaluated  seven 
officer  and  five  enlisted  Area  candidates.  The  officer  selectee  was 
Major  Francis  L.  Ciliberti,  Western  Area,  and  the  enlisted  selectee 
was  Senior  Master  Sergeant  (SMSgt)  Daniel  J.  Lovick,  Pacific  Area. 
Both  were  submitted  to  ARPC  for  the  Outstanding  IMA  of  the  Year  Board 
which  was  scheduled  to  convene  on  27  January  1983.67 
sW 
_^_^  The  AFIS/RE  DACP  Screening  Board  evaluated  eleven  reserve 
enlisted  candidates  on  15  June,  and  recommended  six  to  the  25  August 
ARPC  DACP  Board.  All  those  recommended  were  accepted  for 
commissioning  during  Septemn-e-.  'hi  reserve  Non-Extended  Active  Duty 
(NONEAD)  Officer  Unit  Vacancy  (UV)  and  Permanent  Mandatory  Promotion 
(Reserve  Officer  Promotion  Act  (ROPA))  function  experienced  another 
busy  and  extremely  fruitful  year  as  indicated  in  the  statistics  on 
Table  3-4.  Overall,  APIS  statistics  were  higher  than  AFRES  in  all 
categories  with  the  exception  of  promotion  to  Lieutenant  Colonel. 68 
TABLE  3-4 
R0D-  AN?  UNIT  VACANCY  PROGRAM  STATUS* 
ROPA 
*  eligible/selected/rate: 
date/grade     afis/re  af  reserve 
UNIT  VACANCY 
NOMINATED/SELECTED/RATE 
AFIS/RE    AF  RESERVE 
OCT 
COL 
34/6 
(1B%)  373/39  (lOin 
N/A 
N/A 
JUN 
LTC 
22/7 
(32%)  195/141  (72%) 
10/7 
(70%) 
91/42  (46%) 
MAR 
MAJ 
60/56 
(93%)  284/250  (83%) 
13/13 (100%) 284/250  (88%) 
AUG 
CAPT 
10/10 
(100%)32/32   (100%) 
2/2 
(100%) 17/14   (82%) 
_    The  Reserve  NONEAD  Enlisted  Promotion  Screening  Board 
convened  on  4  August.   The  statistics  on  Table  3-5  represent  the 
number  of  personnel  considered,  recommended,  and  promoted  as  of  31 
December. 69 
*   Abbreviations  used:   COL-  Colonel  (0-6);  LTC 
(0-5);  MAJ  -  Major  (0-4);  CAPT  -  Captain  (0-3). 
Lieutenant  Colonel
TABLE  3-5 
ENLISTED  PROMOTION  STATUS* 
GRADE 
CONSIDERED/RECOMMENDED 
PROMOTED  AS  OF  31  DEC 
CMSGT 
10/5 
SMSGT 
28/7 
MSGT 
27/8 
TSGT 
33/11 
SSGT 
11/11 
SRA/SGT 
2/2 
111/44    39" 
Reservists  continued  to  be  recognized  for  their 
accomplishments  and  outstanding  support  by  way  of  awards  and 
decorations.  The  Branch  processed  81  letters  of  appreciation 
recognizing  outstanding  accomplishments.  Statistics  for  awards  and 
decorations  are  included  on  Table  3-6. 70 
TABLE  3-6 
AWARDS  AND  DECORATIONS SUMMARY 
Type  of                  Number 
Award                  Processed 
Number 
Approved** 
Number 
Di  s approved 
Meritorous  Service  Medal       33 
Air  Force  Commendation  Medal    79 
Air  Force  Achievement  Medal     27 
TOTAL  139         120  4 
^  ^  The  Records  Maintenance  Section  continued  responsibility  for 
the  daily  operation,  maintenance,  management,  and  control  of  the 
computerized  Intelligence  Reserve  Information  System  (IRIS),  and 
officer  and  enlisted  command  selection  records  for  approximately  1270 
*  Abbreviations  used:  CMSGT  -  Chief  Master  Sergeant  (E-9); 
SMSGT  -  Senior  Master  Sergeant  (E-8);  MSGT  -Master  Sergeant  (E~7); 
TSGT  -  Technical  Sergeant  (E-6);  SSGT  -  Staff  Sergeant  (E-5);  SGT  - 
Sergeant  (E-4);  and  SRA  -  Senior  Airman  (E-4). 
**  The  figure  reflects  some  awards  processed  in  1981,  but 
approved  in  1982.
8S 
personnel.  Considerable  time  was  spent  in  development  and  design  of  a 
better,  more  functional,  computerized  IRIS  system.  The  IRIS  system 
provided  greatly  improved  data  availability  and  data  manipulation 
capability.  It  was  responsive,  easy  to  maintain,  and  easy  to  address 
ad  hoc  requirements  for  reports.  Automated  Personnel  Data  System  re- 
view products  were  received  from  ARPC  twice  yearly  and  filed  in  1270 
Command  Records  Folders.  Approximately  870  hours  were  logged  in 
maintenance  and  update  of  mechanized  data  pertinent  to  the  IRIS 
Computer  Program.  A  total  of  1500  scheduled  reports  were  processed 
in  addition  to  a  myriad  of  unscheduled  reports.  Computer  product 
support  was  provided  by  USAF  Data  Services,  (Pentagon),  for  the 
abbreviated  master  report,  incumbent  roster,  and  security  roster 
generated  from  IRIS.7* 
Administrative  Management 
^^  The  Administrative  Management  Office  (AFIS/REA)  realigned 
task  requirements  and  redirected  the  work  flow  creating  a  more 
efficient  operation.  It's  responsibilities  included  casualty 
reporting,  maintaining  and  updatir  :  the  active  duty  unit  manning 
document,  and  forwarding  recruitin  packages  to  candidates  for  the 
AFIR  Program.  To  consolidate  the  1  ge  amount  of  correspondence  sent 
out  to  the  field,  REA  prepa-ed  week  y  mailing  to  each  DTS  Commander. 
In  addition  to  routine  actiori,  REA  f-ovided  administrative  support  in 
the  preparation,  production,  anc  dissemination  of  Exercise  Operational 
Plan  (QPLAN)  Advanced  Interrogation  1982.72 
ATTACHE  AFFAIRS 
Mission  and  Resources. 
^tt  The  Directorate  of  Attache  Affairs  (AFIS/INH)  developed 
capabilities  for  Air  Force  participation  in  the  Defense  Attache  System 
(DAS);  monitored  the  performance  and  results  of  that  participation  and 
exercised  cognizance  over  Air  Force  aspects  of  the  Attache  program; 
and  managed  the  Air  Force  Area  Specialist  Program  (ASP).  AFIS/INH,  in 
coordination  with  Headquarters  USAF  and  the  Air  Force  Manpower  and 
Personnel  Center  (AFMPC),  authorized,  reviewed,  evaluated,  and 
nominated  highly  qualified  officers  and  airmen  for  assignment  to  the 
Defense  Intelligence  Agency  (DIA)  for  use  in  the  DAS.  Attache  Affairs 
monitored  personnel  who  had  served  in  the  DAS  for  potential  assignment 
to  other  Air  Attache/Area  Specialist  positions  and  prepared  and 
conducted  briefings  on  enlisted  and  officer  attache  duty.7^ 
   The  directorate  monitored  prospective  Air  Attache  personnel 
selected  for  assignment  to  the  Air  Force  ASP;  selected  Attache/ASP 
designates  to  attend  the  Army  Institute  of  Advanced  European  Studies, 
the  Naval  Postgraduate  Program  (12  months  of  academic  study),  followed 
by  concentrated  language  training  at  the  Defense  Language  Institute  in 
Monterery,  California;  monitored  training  programs  and  student 
progression  in  schools  such  as  the  Defense  Intelligence  School, 
Defense  Language   Institute,   Naval   Postgraduate  School;  entered
Attache/Area  Specialist  designates  into  training  programs  to  assure 
broad  knowledge  of  Air  Force  plans,  doctrine,  equipment,  and 
capabilities  through  formalized  briefing  and  orientations,  including 
special  aircraft  (hardware)  familiarization  and  training  with 
appropriate  civilian  (industry)  and  military  activities;  and  supported 
the  Air  Attaches  assigned  to  the  Defense  Attache  System  with  numerous 
Air  Force  related  products  and  special  requests  from  the  stations. 74 
m^  Attache  Affairs  also  managed  the  Air  Force  Representational 
Gift  Program.  These  were  tasteful  but  inexpensive  gifts  purchased  for 
or  given  to  individuals,  organizations,  or  groups  who  were  in  a 
position  to  assist  in  developing  social  contacts.  The  directorate 
managed  the  Attache  Tutorial  Program  to  insure  that  language  fluency 
skills  were  maintained  during  the  training  program;  and  administered 
the  Naval  Postgraduate  School  Guest  Lecture  program  that  provided 
speeches  by  international  affairs  experts  to  USAF  Area  Specialist 
students.  Finally,  AFIS/INH  administered  the  USAF  Biographical  Sketch 
Program  which  provided  background  information  on  Attache  personnel  to 
interested  agencies. 75 
flfll  In  March  1982,  the  two  subdivisions  of  Attache  Affairs, 
Operations  and  Training  (AFIS/INHO)  and  Attache  Selection  (AFIS/INHS), 
were  reorganized  to  form  two  new  divisions,  Officer  Selection/Training 
and  Support/Area  Specialist  (AFIS/INHO)  and  Enlisted  Selection/Admin- 
istration (AFIS/INHE).  Manning  statistics  remained  the  same  with  a 
total  of  13  authorized  and  12  assigned.  Colonel  James  E.  Steinmiller 
continued  as  the  overall  Director.'6 
    The  Officer  Selection  and  Training  Division  was  responsible 
for  the  recruitment,  evaluation,  selection  and  nomination  of  Air  Force 
officers  for  assignment  to  the  DAS;  coordinated  assignment  actions 
with  Headquarters  USAF,  DIA  and  AFMPC;  responsible  for  and 
participated  in  the  operation  of  officer  selection  panels;  monitored 
training  programs  at  the  Defense  Intelligence  College,  Defense 
Language  Institute  and  Foreign  Service  Institute;  selected  and 
controlled  Air  Attache  Designates  for  attendance  at  the  Area 
Specialist  Program  at  the  Naval  Postgraduate  School;  was  the  Office  of 
Primary  Responsibility  (OPR)  for  monitoring  the  Air  Force  Area 
Specialist  Program;  developed  and  maintained  the  budget  for  all  travel 
per  diem  and  training  of  Air  Force  personnel  in  the  DAS;  prepared  and 
conducted  briefings  on  duty  within  the  DAS;  established  and  entered 
attache  designates  into  special  training  programs  for  language, 
equipment  and  aircraft  familiarization;  managed  a  separate  attache 
language  tutor  program;  was  the  Point  of  Contact  (POC)  for  all 
requests  for  assistance  from  attaches  on  station;  coordinated  special 
support  activities  within  Headquarters  USAF;  managed  the  Air  Force 
Representational  Gift  Program;  and  monitored  and  financed  the  Naval 
Postgraduate  School  Guest  Lecture  Program. 77 
_  The  Enlisted  Selection  and  Administration  Division  was 
responsible  for  the  recruitment,  evaluation,  selection  and  nomination 
of  Noncommissioned  Officers   (NCOs)   for  assignment  to  the  DAS;
coordinated  assignment  actions  with  DIA  and  AFMPC;  was  responsible  for 
and  participated  in  the  operation  of  enlisted  selection  panels; 
monitored  training  programs  at  the  Defense  Intelligence  College; 
provided  administrative  support  for  the  directorate;  managed  Air  Force 
briefing  and  debriefings  programs  for  attaches  departing  for  or 
returning  from  duty;  managed  the  Mid-Tour  Reports  from  attaches  on 
station;  managed  the  Attache  Biographical  Program;  maintained  Air 
Force  publications  accounts  and  stocked  forms  for  the  directorate;  and 
established  office  suspense  files  and  acted  as  the  directorate  control 
point  for  all  communications. ?8 
Significant  Factors 
t|  ^  The  Directorate  of  Attache  Affairs  needed  one  additional 
officer  position  to  adequately  fulfill  mission  requirements.  The 
additional  position  would  enable  the  directorate  to  sustain  current 
important  attache  programs  and  expand  the  capabilities  of  the  Area 
Specialist  Program.  The  position  was  projected  for  FY  83. 79 
   The  continuance  and  expansion  of  the  Area  Specialist  Program 
depended  on  the  identification  and  validation  of  area  specialist 
requirements  worldwide.  An  Air  Staff -coordinated  effort  began  during 
the  year  to  have  potential  users  better  identify  their  requirements  to 
insure  that  sufficient  training  quotas  were  generated  to  meet  future 
Air  Force  needs.  The  directorate  required  the  additional  position 
mentioned  earlier  to  implement  and  monitor  this  effort. 80 
_  The  directorate  needed  an  ATLAS  inquiry  capability  to 
provide  direct  access  to  the  Air  Force  Manpower  and  Personnel  Center 
(AFMPC)  computer.  This  would  provide  up-to-the-minute  data  retrieval 
capability  on  all  Air  Force  personnel  worldwide.  It  would  also  assist 
in  screening  and  identifying  potential  candidates  for  the  attache 
system  and  eliminate  the  duplication  of  having  to  update  the 
directorate's  own  HAZElTINE  computer  when  there  were  personnel  changes 
on  people  already  in  the  Attache  System.  In  addition,  it  would  give 
Attache  Affairs,  as  Office  of  Primary  Responsiblity  (OPR)  for  the  Area 
Specialist  Program,  the  capability  of  tracking  area  specialists,  and 
area  specialist  positions  worldwide.  This  capability  was  required  for 
FY  83.81 
f^  P  Corporate  experience  had  shown  that  ^ery  few  people  in  the 
Air  Force  really  knew  what  the  Defense  Attache  System  was  all  about. 
Therefore,  it  was  incumbent  upon  the  directorate  to  "spread  the  word" 
about  the  system.  In  this  regard,  Attache  Affairs  prepared  a  slide 
briefing  and  planned  to  present  it  to  various  Air  Force  population 
centers  such  as  the  Air  Force  Academy,  Reserv-  Officer  Training  Corp 
(ROTC)  detachments,  Professional  Military  Education  (PME)  schools, 
Officer  Training  School  (OTS),  and  the  Major  Commands.  These 
briefings  would  have  a  dual  purpose.  They  were  an  excellent  method  of 
recruiting,  and  they  publicized  the  attache  system.  INH  also  worked 
closely  with  Mr.  Mark  E.  Brent  (Lieutenant  Colonel,  USAF,  Retired), 
writer  and  former  air  attache  in  Cambodia,  to  publish  the  very 
informative  article  "Air  Attaches  An:wer  the  Questions"  in  the 
September  issue  of  Air  Fo^-ce  Magazine. 8?
f|  ^  Of  prime  concern  to  the  directorate  was  the  release  of 
highTyqualif led  personnel  for  the  attache  system  and  the  area 
specialist  program.  All  to  frequently,  AFMPC  would  not  release  the 
people  needed.  This  forced  the  directorate  to  either  accept  personnel 
who  were  less  qualified  or  fight  to  find  and  obtain  release  of 
qualified  people.  This  created  an  ongoing  adversary  relationship  with 
career  managers  other  than  Palace  Sentinel  from  whom  this  release  had 
to  be  obtained. 83 
    Another  issue  of  major  concern  was  the  time  involved  in 
obtaining  release  of  personnel  from  AFMPC.  Frequently,  the 
directorate  had  to  wait  several  weeks  for  assignment  availability 
which  resulted  in  late  nominations  to  the  Defense  Intelligence  Agency 
(DIA)  and  caused  hardship  on  individuals  who  had  to  move  on  very  short 
notice:.  If  the  requested  individual  was  not  made  available,  then  the 
directorate  had  to  start  over  seeking  another  candidate,  which  threw 
the  selection  process  even  further  behind. &4 
fl£  The  selection  process  was  delayed  even  further  by  the 
inordinate  amount  of  time  that  DIA  frequently  took  to  approve  attache 
nominations.  Consequently,  the  directorate  continued  to  actively 
pursue  this  issue  with  DIA(AT)  in  an  attempt  to  reduce  the  delay. 85 
Mtk  An  issue  involving  the  Area  Specialist  Program  was  the 
idennncaticn  of  area  specialist  requirements.  The  users  were  very 
often  reluctant  to  validate  their  manning  documents  to  show  a 
requirement  for  an  area  specialist.  This  reluctance  stemmed  partially 
because  of  "artificial"  MAJCOM  ceilings  on  the  number  of  advanced 
academic  degree  requirements,  and  therefore  Area  Specialist 
requirements,  each  command  could  have.  The  regulations  clearly  stated 
that  the  identification  of  an  area  specialist  requirement  did  not 
preclude  the  assignment  of  someone  who  was  not  an  area  specialist,  but 
who  was  otherwise  qualified.  This  issue  was  really  one  of  educating 
the  user  and  removing  artificially  imposed  limitations  so  that  the 
number  of  area  specialist  positions  reflected  actual  needs. 86 
The  directorate  also  proposed  two  new  initiatives  designed 
to  give  the  intelligence  community  a  more  accurate  picture  of  the 
number  of  linguists  and  leyels  of  language  proficiency  available  Air 
Force  wide.  The  initiatives  involved  minor  adjustments  to  the 
personnel  system  to:  (1)  make  testing  in  the  Defense  Language 
Aptitude  Battery  (DLAB)  mardatory  for  all  officers  entering  active 
duty,  and  (2)  make  language  proficiency  testing  and  retesting 
mandatory  vice  optional,  for  all  officers  professing  language 
proficiency  and  or  provided  language  training  at  government  expense. 
These  initiatives  should  be  implemented  during  FY  83. 87 
    Personnel  interested  in  assignments  in  the  attache  system 
were  frequently  discouraged  and  or  deterred  from  applying  by  the 
significant  dollar  outlay  required  to  "get  ready"  for  attache  duty. 
As  a  result,  the  directorate  planned  to  address  the  issue  of  up-front 
costs  with  DIA(AT)  and  seek  relief  for  attache  candidates  from  the 
burden  of  borrowing  or  using  personal  savings  to  finance  their 
assignment  to  the  attache  system. 88
flP  Language  proficiency  was  recognized  as  an  important  and 
valuable  asset  to  the  fulfillment  of  the  attache  mission.  Language 
aptitude,  howevc,  was  extremely  difficult  to  measure  with  accuracy 
and  certainty.  The  minimum  DLAB  score  of  100,  imposed  by  OIA,  would 
not  by  itself  assure  that  a  prospective  candidate  would  attain  the 
desired  goals.  Colonel  Steinmiller  stated  the  directorate  would  work 
to  support  DlA's  requirements  to  the  best  of  its  ability  but 
acknowledged  that  there  might  be  some  instances  where  these 
requirements  (i.e.  100  DLAB  score)  must  be  waived  to  realistically 
meet  existing  conditions. 89 
Operations  and  Training 
flp  Table  3-7  provides  a  summary  of  officer  and  enlisted  attache 
selecuon  panels  conducted  during  1982.  One  new  enlisted  position, 
Flight  Mechanic  (AFSC-A43172),  was  created  at  the  U.S.  Defense  Attache 
Office  in  Morrocco.-^ 
TABLE  3-7 
ATTACHE  SELECTION  STATISTICS 
CATEGORY  OFFICER  ENLISTED 
Total  Panels  Conducted  45  21 
Approved  by  Panels  36  21 
Disapproved  by  Panels  2  0 
Total  That  Withdrew  After  Panels  4  0 
Nominated  to  DIA  40  39 
Approved  by  OIA  33  *  37 
Approved  by  DIA  but  Returned 
Due  To  Incumbent  Extension  0  1 
Total  That  Withdrew  After 
Approval  by  DIA  3  1 
Total  Disapproved  by  DIA  0  2 
Consecutive  Overseas  Tours  2  8 
Prior  Attache  Members  Selected  1  3 
Promotions  for  attache  incumbents,  designates,  and  ex- 
attaches  remained  higher  than  Air  Force  averages  throughout  the  year. 
Table  3-8  summarizes  attache  promotion  statistics  for  1982.91 
*  Two  were  still  pending  as  of  31  December,
TABLE  3- 8 
ATTACHE  PROMOTION STATISTICS 
GRADE 
NUMBER 
ELIGIBLE 
NUMBER 
SELECTED 
ATTACHE 
SELECTION 
PERCENTAGE 
AIR  FORCE 
SELECTION 
PERCENTAGE 
Colonel 
Lt  Colonel 
Major 
CMSgt 
SMSgt 
MSgt 
TSgt 
13 7 
q 
83.3 
84.6 
100.0 
50.0 
33.3 
43.0 
33.3 
44.0 
65.0 
76.0 
30.9 
16.9 
32.5 
20.6 
The  Naval  Postgraduate  School  Guest  Lecture  Program  included 
56  guest  speakers  at  a  total  cost  of  $9,411.  The  1932  Tutor  Program 
supported  ten  languages  including  Hebrew,  Russian,  Spanish,  Tagalog, 
Portuguese,  Arabic,  Greek,  German  and  Turkish.  A  total  of  577  hours 
were  used  at  a  total  cost  of  S8,291.92 
13^fu 
   Attache  representatives  made  four  trips  during  the  year.  On 
12-13^~A~ugust,  Lieutenant  Colonel  Edward  D.  Gillaspy,  Chief  of  the 
Officer  Selection,  Training  and  Support  Division,  made  a  trip  to  the 
Naval  Postgraduate  School  (NPS)  and  the  Defense  Language  Institute 
(DLI).  On  12  August,  he  visited  with  the  Superintendent  of  the  NPS, 
Rear  Admiral  Ekelund.  Much  of  the  discussion  with  Admiral  Ekelund 
centered  around  the  possiblity  of  establishing  an  Air  Force  liaison 
officer  billet  for  AFIS/INH  students  attending  N?S  and  DLL93 
11$  The  Admiral  stated  he  might  be  receptive  to  an  Air  Force 
professorship  with  additional  duty  as  a  liaison  officer,  rather  than  a 
billet  expressly  for  liaison  purposes.  In  further  discussions  with 
Admiral  Ekelund,  he  revealed  that  plans  to  establish  a  Latin  American 
curriculum  was  being  considered,  but  the  actual  logistics  had  not  been 
worked  out.94 
/  had 
    In  general,  the  students  were  extremely  pleased  with  NPS. 
They  TTad  laudatory  remarks  for  the  school,  the  instructors  and  the 
administration.  On  the  other  hand,  the  students  (excluding  attache 
designates)  were  considerably  concerned  about  end  assignments  after 
NPS  and  DLL  Colonel  Gillaspy  explained  that,  unfortunately,  there 
was  no  guarantee  of  assignment  to  an  area  specialist  position  after 
graduation.  However,  the  probability  of  an  assignment  was  increasing 
due  to  the  recent  Air  Force  wide  assessment  of  area  specialist 
needs. 95 
In  stark  contrast  from  the  NPS  students,  DLI  students  were 
generally  displeased  with  DLI.  The  most  common  complaints  were  the 
heavy  course  workload,  a  perceived  lack  of  responsiveness  from  DLI 
administration   and   instructors'   unstructured   teaching   methods.
9« 
Althougn  the  environment  at  OLI  was  not  ideal,  students  did  well  and 
did  graduate  with  tne  required  language  skills.  Thus,  Colonel 
Gillaspy  believed  the  goals  and  objectives  of  the  school  were  being 
adequately  met. 96 
    From  26  August  to  17  September,  Colonel  Steinmiller  and 
Senior  Master  Sergeant  Kenneth  E.  Pool,  Noncommissioned  Officer  in 
Charge  (NCOIC)  of  Attache  Affairs,  conducted  a  staff  visit  to  the 
Defense  Attache  Offices  (DAOs)  in  Moscow,  USSR;  Warsaw,  Poland; 
Bucharest,  Romania;  Sofia,  Bulgaria;  Belgrade,  Yugoslavia;  Budapest, 
Hungary;  Prague,  Czechoslovakia;  and  the  USCINUER.  The  purpose  of  the 
trip  was  to  discuss  face-to-face  several  matters  of  Air  Force  interest 
and  to  gain  firsthand  knowledge  of  working  and  living  conditions  at 
the  various  DAOs  in  order  to  enhance  the  attache  and  NCO  selection 
process.  Several  problems  were  identified  during  the  visits  including 
inadequate  housing,  poor  management,  and  manning  difficulties. 
Solutions  for  these  problems  were  still  being  reviewed  by  the  end  of 
the  year. 97 
4B  0n  21  and  ?2  September,  Brigadier  General  William  B.  Webb 
(former  Defense  Attache  to  Beijing,  China)  visited  the  NPS  and  the  DLI 
at  Monterey,  California.  While  there,  he  addressed  the  students  in 
the  National  Security  Affairs  Curriculum  at  NPS  (including  AFIS/INH 
Area  Specialists)  on  the  role  of  the  attache  in  general  and 
specifically  on  his  experiences  in  and  impressions  of  China.  A 
similar,  but  more  formal  (unclassified)  session  was  held  with  Area 
Specialist  students  and  other  interested  attendees  enrolled  in  Asian 
language  studies  at  DLI.  According  to  Lieutenant  Colonel  (selectee) 
Dave  Walters  (the  senior  Area  Specialist  student  at  DLI),  General 
Webb's  visit  and  presentations  were  extremely  well  received  by  all 
concerned. 58 
From  9-15  September,  Captain  Cynthia  Gibbs,  Chief  of  the 
Officer  Attache  Selection  Branch,  attended  the  Defense  Attache  (DATT) 
Conference  in  Garmisch,  Germany  and  visited  the  DAOs  in  Belgium  and 
France.  The  main  purpose  of  the  DATT  Conference  was  for  DIA/AT  to 
relay  to  the  DATTs  some  updated  security  concerns  about  third-country 
involvement  in  Africa,  to  reemphasize  some  DIA  administrative 
procedures  and  for  the  DATTs  to  air  any  possible  concerns  they  might 
have  had.  The  conference  provided  a  forum  to  talk  to  attaches 
presently  on  station  and  to  hear  some  of  their  problems.  In  addition, 
by  talking  to  the  DATTs  and  African  analysts,  Captain  Gibbs  gained 
valuable  insight  as  to  the  type  of  individuals  best  suited  for  duties 
in  African  countries. 99 
    On  9  September,  Captain  Gibbs  visited  the  Director  of 
Curriculum  at  the  U.S.  Army  Russian  Institute.  A  significant  portion 
of  the  discussion  centered  around  misconceptions  about  the  purpose  of 
the  school.  The  Director  pointed  out  that  the  school  was  for  Russian 
area  studies  and  not  language  training.  The  main  reason  students 
maintained  or  increased  their  proficiency  while  at  Garmisch  was 
because  all  the  courses  were  taught  in  Russian.  This  was  not  to  say 
the  school  did  not  have  language  classes.   They  did,  but  they  were
limited  because  the  school's  emphasis  was  on  area  studies.  The 
Director  suggested  that  AFIS/INH  look  into  the  possibility  of  sending 
attaches  to  the  DLI  for  language  training  and  then  to  Garmisch  for 
area  studies.  Currently,  attaches  attended  the  NPS  for  area  studies, 
followed  by  language  training  at  DLI  and  then  to  the  Garmisch  school 
for  in-country  language.  3oth  training  schedules  took  three  years  to 
complete. 1°° 
^M  The  Area  Specialist  Selection  Board  convened  on  9  November 
to  select  13  candidates  to  enter  training  in  FY  83.  The  board 
considered  20  applicants  who  were  eligible  and  available  for 
assignment.  The  13  selected  were  scheduled  to  attend  training  for  a 
Master's  Degree  and  language  in  a  specific  geographical  area. 
Assignment  after  graduation  would  be  determined  by  AFMPC  based  on  the 
needs  of  the  Air  Force  at  that  time.  The  geographical  areas  to  be 
studied  included  Soviet,  Sub-Saharan  Africa,  Far  East,  Middle  East, 
Latin  America,  and  Western  and  Eastern  Europe. 101 
Support  on  Station 
^IB  AFIS/INH  provided  on  station  support  to  all  DAOs  during 
1982.  The  following  examples  illustrate  some  of  the  types  of  support 
provided.  On  22  January,  the  DAO  in  New  Delhi,  India,  received  a 
request  from  Headquarters  Indian  Air  Force  (IAF)  on  details  concerning 
management  and  operation  of  an  air  race  planned  as  part  of  the  IAF 
Jubillee  celebration.  In  particular,  the  IAF  requested  information  on 
the  handicapping  race  system  normally  applied  to  aircraft  of  differing 
performance.  AFIS/INH  assistance  was  requested  as  part  of  the 
continuing  effort  to  enhance  the  DAO's  relationship  with  Headguarters 
IAF.  The  information  was  researched  and  provided  as  requested. '02 
f|P  On  27  May,  the  DAO  of  Muscat,  Oman,  received  a  request  for 
technical  assistance.  The  Sultan  of  Oman's  Air  Force  (SOAF)  had 
purchased  an  aircraft  arrestor  system  made  by  the  American  Engineering 
Company,  from  Ireland.  Specifically,  the  request  wanted  to  find  out 
if  the  U.S.  military  or  Federal  Aviation  Agency  (FAA)  had  any 
restrictions  on  the  system  (i.e.  if  there  were  certain  aircraft  which 
could  not  land  or  taxi  over  the  arresting  cable).  AFIS/INH  contacted 
the  company  and  they  stated  no  restrictions  existed.  However,  they 
did  recommend  taxiing  at  low  speed. 103 
M&  The  last  example  involved  a  request  for  three  Space  Shuttle 
Colombia  photographs  from  the  DAO  in  Budapest,  Hungary.  AFIS/INH 
obtained  the  photos  as  requested  and  forwarded  them  to  NASA  for 
autograph  by  the  Space  Shuttle  Astronauts  (John  Young  and  Robert 
Crippen).  The  autographed  photos  were  then  forwarded  to  the  Air 
Attache  in  Hungary  who  presented  them  to  the  Hungarian  Astronauts  on 
behalf  of  the  United  States  Embassy. 104 
Incidents  on  Station 
* 
CO 
to 
a. 
&
EVASION,  ESCAPE  AND  PRISONER  OF  WAR 
MISSION  AND  RESOURCES 
Organization  and  Mission 
W/k  The  APIS  Directorate  of  Evasion,  Escape,  and  Prisoner  of  War 
(E&E/PwT  (AFIS/INR)  was  formed  on  1  July  1980  from  elements  of  the 
7602nd  Air  Intelligence  Group  in  recognition  of  the  growing 
responsibilities  of  E&E/PW  mission  and  the  direct  support  this 
provided  to  Air  Force  combat  forces,  the  Major  Commands  (MAJCOMs),  and 
the  Air  Staff.  As  action  officer  for  intelligence  aspects  of  the 
'Department  of  Defense  (DOC)  Evasion  and  Escape  Program,  the 
directorate  was  involved  in  nearly  all  aspects  of  E&E/PW  matters.*^ 
m 
Join' 
The  authorities  for  operation  of  the  directorate  included 
the  ~JbTnt  Chiefs  of  Staff  Memorandum  (JCSM)  676-71;  Department  of 
Defense  Directive  1300.7;  Air  Force  Regulation  50-16;  USAF 
Headquarters  Operating  Instruction  21-5;  PflS  Regulation  23-1;  and  Air 
Force  Intelligence  Operating  Instruction  80-1.10° 
   The  directorate  consisted  of  two  divisions:   the  Code  of 
Conduct  and  Survival,  Evasion,  Resistance  and  Escape  (SERE)  Division 
(AFIS/INRA)  and  the  Defense  Support  Programs  Division  (AFIS/INRB). 
Responsibilities  of  INRA  included  continuing  production  and  updating 
of  SERE  contingency  guides  for  use  by  operational  units  worldwide;  the 
standardization  of  Code  of  Conduct  training  throughout  the  military 
services;  and  providing  guidance  and  instruction  in  special  peacetime 
hostage  survival  training  for  Air  Force  personnel  in  high-risk  of 
capture  or  militarily  sensitive  positions.  The  Defense  Support 
Proarams  Division  (INRB)  developed  operational  concepts, 
o 
u 
a> 
p. 
a> 
*j 
a 
iH 
<U 
P 
to 
ft? 
h 
o.
?r^eiei 
The  missions  of  AFIS/INR  were  unique  to  the  command.  No 
other~eTement  of  the  Air  Force  or  other  services  devoted  the  degree  of 
attention  to  E&E/PW  training  that  AFIS  did.  The  19  officers,  enlisted 
personnel  and  civilians  of  AFIS/INR  made  unique  contributions  to 
wartime  readiness.  As  the  Assistant  Chief  of  Staff,  Intelligence's 
(ACS/I's)  action  office  for  the '•  matters,  INR  produced  Survival, 
Evasion,  Resistance  and  Escape  (SERE)  Contingency  Guides.  The  SERE 
Guides  were  finished  intelligence  documents  tailored  to  the 
specialized  needs  of  potential  evaders,  prisoners  of  war,  rescue 
forces,  and  operational  planners  at  headquarters  worldwide.  As  such, 
they  were  in  active  use  by  over  235  operational  units  of  all  four 
services.*10 
The  Joint  E&E  Manual  (AFM  200-3)  had  been  heavily  reworked 
and  the  draft  was  being  prepared  for  the  JCS  by  the.  end  of  the  year. 
The  directorate  was  tasked  with  drafting  the  updated  manual  under  the 
Air  Force  charter  as  000  Executive  Agent  for  joint  E&E/PW 
publications.il1 
flP  The  directorate  was  also  the  AF/IN-AFIS  action  office  for 
planning  and  conducting  debriefings  of  returned  U.S.  prisoners  of  war 
and  peacetime  detainees.  INR  was  instrumental  in  debriefing  all 
returning  Air  Force  PW's  from  Southeast  Asia  during  Operation 
Homecoming,  and  the  three  Air  Force  hostage  returnees  from  Iran.  INR 
also  participated  in  the  intelligence  community  debrief  of  recovered 
Red  Brigade  hostage  General  Dozier.11? 
A  DOD  Directive  and  Air  Force  Regulation  tasked  INR  with 
responsibility  to  standardize  Code  of  Conduct  training  among  all 
services.  By  the  end  of  the  year,  traininq  standards  were  being 
promulgated.  In  the  future,  training  materials  were  scheduled  to  De 
drafted  and  coordinated  with  training  and  policy  elements  of  all 
services.114 
O 
• p 
m 
u 
a 
a> 
u 
4J 
C 
V) 
CO 
vt 
h 
a 
Budget  Status 
Table  3-9  reflects  the  INR  budget  for  FY  82  and  S3. 
Overall,  the  FY  83  budget  reflected  an  increase  of  538,700.  The 
reasons  for  this  increase  of  slightly  over  57  percent  included: 
additional  travel  in  suDport  of  the  implementation  of  Code  of  Conduct- 
related  policies;  the  need  for  maintenance  contracts  on  new  equipment 
acquired    by    INRB;    an    increase    in    suDplies    necessary    to    support    this
equipment  and  an  increase  in  the  cost  of  conductina  Exercise  Ridge 
Runner.113 
TAslE  3-8 
BUDGET  STATUS 
TOTAL 
CATEGOPY 
FY  82 
FY  83 
Travel 
$39,000 
$60,000 
Rental  Equipment 
800 
Purchase  Maintenance 
2,200 
14,100 
Misc  Contract  Services 
14,500 
15,000 
Supply 
7,200 
13,300 
Equipment 
3,300 
3,300 
$67,700 
$105,700 
Limiting  Factors 
1982  m Factors  which  limited  INR's  progress  toward  its  objectives 
in  1982  were  funding  limitations  for  R&D  projects;  limited  engineering 
manyear  support  fron  Air  Force  Systems  Command  (AFSC);  and  manpower 
vacancies  within  the  directorate.  c 
176 
C*4 
* 
u 
D
M%  To  overcome  these  limitations,  INRB  met  with  representatives 
from  aTCC  in  late  1982  to  discuss  what  steps  could  be  taken  to 
increase  funding  and  engineering  support  provided  by  AFSC.  The 
results  of  the  talks  were  encouraging,  but  by  year's  end  no  final 
decisions  had  been  made  on  these  issues. H9 
PLack  of  manpower  within  the  directorate  was  another  limiting 
particularly  within  the  Code  of  Conduct/SERE  Division  (INRA). 
In  January,  the  SERE  Branch  Chief,  Captain  Randolph  F.  Dudley, 
departed  on  regular  PCS.  Since  a  replacement  for  Captain  Dudley  had 
not  been  provided  by  Air  Force  Manpower  and  Personnel  Center  (AFMPC), 
Captain  Allen  Michaels,  one  of  the  two  SERE  Guide  production  officers, 
was  designated  the  new  Branch  Chief.  The  demands  of  this  position 
allowed  Captain  Michaels  to  devote  only  half  of  his  time  solely  to 
research  and  editing  of  SERE  Guide  material  --  thus  reducing 
production  efforts  by  50  percent.  In  August,  the  INRA  Division  Chief, 
Major  Paul  Munninghoff  departed,  and,  once  again,  no  replacement  was 
identified  by  AFMPC.  Mr.  Claude  Watkins  was  then  designated  the 
division  chief  pending  identification  and  arrival  of  a  replacement  for 
Major  Munninghoff.  These  two  officer  billets  were  still  vacant  as  of 
31  December.  This  situation  resulted  in  the  loss  to  INRA  of 
approximately  1.5  manyears  during  the  year.  Additionally,  a  civilian 
(GS-12)  position  which  was  created  in  late  1982  remained  vacant  by 
year's  end.  Colonel  Ronald  Webb,  Director  of  AFIS/INR,  hoped  that  the 
various  personnel  offices  would  be  more  responsive  to  the 
directorate's  needs  in  1983. 120 
CODE  OF  CONDUCT  AND  SERE 
Code  of  Conduct 
^^  The  Code  of  Conduct  Branch  was  tasked  with  the  mission  of 
formulating  and  supervising  the  implementation  of  Code  of  Conduct 
policies  within  the  Department  of  Defense.  As  such,  it  monitored  the 
Code  of  Conduct  training  programs  of  all  four  services  for  uniformity 
and  consistency.  Additionally,  the  Code  of  Conduct  Branch  conducted 
and  monitored  evasion  and  escape  training  for  all  four  services  and 
conducted,  when  requested,  hostage  and  terrorist  kidnapping  survival 
training  for  the  services. "1 
      As   the  action  office  for  the   Executive  Agent  (the  Secretary 
of  the  Air  Force)  for  Code  of  Conduct-related  training  programs  within 
the  Department  of  Defense,  INRA  reviewed  (for  content)  and  coordinated 
on  the  following  directives:  AFR  50-16,  Code  of  Conduct  Training,  and 
AFR  208-1,  USAF  Anti terrorist  Program.  In  addition,  the  branch 
provided  input  for  the  updating  of  OCSM  675-71,  Delineation  of 
Responsibilities  for  Evasion  and  Escape  (E&E);  conducted  an 
evaluation  of  the  USAF  Academy's  SERE  program;  and  reviewed  the 
Security  Classification  Guide  for  Resistance  Training.  This  review 
led  to  INRA's  action  to  reclassify  this  document  as  a  DOD  security 
classification  guide.  The  Code  of  Conduct  Branch  sponsored  the  visit 
of  the  Joint  Service  Interrogation  Wing  (JSIW)  (from  the  United 
Kingdom)  to  the  SERE  schools  at  Fairchild  AF3,  Washington  and  the 
Navy's     in      San     Diego,      California.  The      JSIW      provided     these
10r. 
organizations  with  classroon  instruction  on  interrogation  techniques. 
This  branch  also  initiatec  action  to  produce  a  Level  "A"  training  film 
entitled  "U.S.  Fighting  Man's  Code  of  Conduct,"  which  was  to  be  used 
by  all  services  in  support  of  DODD  1300.7,  and  provided  code  of 
conduct  policy  guidance  and  technical  expertise  for  the  production  of 
four  training  films  tha*  were  produced  by  the  Defense  Audio-Visual 
Agency  for  use  in  resistance  training. 122 
flP  Mr.  Claude  Watkins,  while  Chief  of  the  Code  of  Conduct 
Branch;  conducted  specialized  terrorist  and  kidnapping  survival 
training  fifty-six  times  during  the  year.  His  audiences  included 
Marine  Corps  Embassy  Guard  trainees,  attache  trainees,  joint  service 
personnel  enroute  to  Military  Assistance  Advisory  Group  (MAAG) 
assignments,  State  Department  security  personnel,  key  National 
Security  Agency  (NSA)  employees,  students  attending  the  Dynamics  of 
International  Terrorism  Course,  and  key  USAF  general  officers. 123 
0|  P  In  early  May,  Mr.  Watkins  supported  Exercise  Condor  Crete 
conducted  in  Upper  Michigan  for  the  purpose  of  exercising  all  facets 
of  Air  Rescue  and  Recovery  on  a  Joint  Service  Basis.  He  organized  and 
was  the  primary  speaker  during  six  hours  on  captivity,  evasion  history 
and  hostage  survival. 124 
«   During  late  January  and  early  February,  Lt  Col  Frank  J. 
,o  (then  Director  of  INR)  and  Mr.  Watkins  represented  AF/IN  at 
the  evasion  and  escape  seminar  portion  of  the  annual  joint  service 
Unconventional  Warfare  Conference  hosted  by  the  Special  Operations 
Task  Force  Europe,  US  European  Command.   It  was  conducted  at  Patch 
Barracks,  Stuttgart,  Germany.   During  the  seminar  Mr.  Watkins  gave  a 
presentation  on  the  history  of  evasion  and  escape  and  both  he  and  Lt       „ 
Col  Capillupo  discussed  and  made  suggestions  on  AFIS  support  of  an       CJ 
escape  and  evasion  exercise,  Fleet  Deer,  scheduled  for  19  April  -  23      3" 
June.  125  2* 
CO 
to 
ft 
a 
u 
a 
During  the  period  25  April  -  6  May,  Mr.  Watkins  supported 
the  pre-exercise  training  segment  of  escape  and  evasion  exercise  Fleet 
___  During  the  period  2-16  July,  Major  Munninghoff  participated 
in  the  ninth  lecture  tour  of  the  UK  major  Headquarters  and  schools. 
Over  the  years,  the  main  participation  had  been  prorated  out  through 
the  four  services  but  the  organizing  and  coordination  had  always  been 
performed  by  INR  in  conjunction  with  the  British  Defense  Intelligence 
Liaison  Staff,  Washington,  DC. 127 
& 
A  major  event  Gf  the  year  was  Exercise  Ridge  Runner  82. 
This  exercise  was  the  second  in  a  series  of  annual  joint  service
101 
evasion  training  exercises  sponsored  and  conducted  by  the  Evasion  and 
Escape  and  Prisoner  of  War  Directorate.  The  explicit  purpose  of  the 
exercise  was  to  provide  concentrated  training  for  selected  members  of 
all  four  U.S.  Armed  Services  whose  duties  entailed  teaching  and  or 
briefing  U.S.  combat  personnel  on  the  subject  of  evasion  or  conducting 
basic,  advanced  or  continuation  evasion  training.  Trainees  received 
classroom  and  field  training,  briefings  by  guest  lecturers,  and 
participated  in  a  week  of  field  maneuvers.  Ridge  Runner  82  was 
conducted  from  19  to  30  September  at  Camp  Dawson,  West  Virginia. 
Fifty-one  student  trainees,  including  members  of  the  Royal  Air  Force 
(United  Kingdom)  participated.  Colonel  Webb  attributed  the  success  of 
the  exercise  to  the  tireless  efforts  of  the  Ridge  Runner  staff  and  the 
support  provided  by  various  guard  and  reserve  elements  and  civilian 
agencies.  The  total  cost  of  the  exercise  was  $32,200,128 
Survival,  Evasion,  Resistance  and  Escape  (SERE) 
fl^  The  mission  of  the  Survival,  Evasion,  Resistance  and  Escape 
(SERtjBranch  was  to  research,  produce  and  disseminate  SERE 
Contingency  Guides.  These  guides,  which  were  country  or  region 
specific,  were  finished  intelligence  products  designed  specifically  to 
meet  the  needs  of  aircrews  and  combat  forces.  They  were  a  compilation 
of  pertinent  data  from  which  information  would  be  extracted  for  use  in 
area  orientation  briefings,  the  development  of  mission  briefings,  and 
the  planning  of  evasion  plans  of  action,  to  name  a  few.  In  addition 
to  the  production  of  SERE  guides,  the  branch  also  served  as  the 
temporary  archives  for  the  USAF  Prisoner  of  War  files. 129 
During  1982,  the  SERE  Branch  researched,  published  and 
disseminated  the  Middle  East  SERE  Contingency  Guide.  This  630  page 
guide  covered  fourteen  countries:  Bahrain,  Egypt,  Iraq,  Israel, 
Jordan,  Kuwait,  Lebanon,  North  Yemen,  Oman,  Oatar,  Saudi  Arabia,  South 
Yemen,  Syra  and  the  United  Arab  Emirates.  The  guide  was  disseminated 
to  over  700  users  within  DOD.  The  branch  also  began  research  and 
production  of  the  North  Africa  SERE  Contingency  Guide.  The  nine 
country  guide  was  scheduled  to  cover  Algeria,  Chad,  Libya,  Mali, 
Mauritania,  Morocco,  Niger,  the  Sudan  and  Tunisia.  The  production 
rate  was  slowed  during  1982  due  to  the  inability  of  AFMPC  to  fill  a 
personnel  slot  that  remained  vacant  for  nearly  the  entire  year,  and 
the  branch's  decision  to  cut  reserve  support  for  the  program  nearly  in 
half.1^ 
    During  the  year,  the  USAF  Southeast  Asia  Prisoner  of  War 
files,  consisting  of  more  than  135,000  pages,  were  sanitized  in 
preparation  for  their  transfer  to  the  Albert  F.  Simpson  Historical 
Research  Center,  Maxwell  AFB,  Alabama.  Mr.  Karl  Owens,  hired  by  the 
directorate  in  a  temporary  overhire  position,  provided  the  needed 
support  to  Chief  Master  Sergeant  Hilary  W.  G.  Edwards  in  this 
endeavor. 131 
Colonel  Webb  realized  the  need  for  advertising  SERE  guides 
to  the" services.  During  the  early  stages  of  development,  Captain 
Dudley  and  CMSgt  Edwards  visited  a  number  of  Navy  Reserve  units  that
le: 
were  supporting 
determined  then 
the  project  to 
trial  there  was 
give  their,  staff  assistance.  It  was 
a  need  not  only  to  brief  supporting 
units  but  to  familiarize  primary  distributees  with  the  "why"  and  "how" 
of  SERE  Guide  production  and  use.  This  became  even  more  evident  as 
comments  and  questions  arrived  frox  the  field  units  using  the 
     T°  help  educate  consumers,  Colonel  Jack  Morris  (then 
AFIS/CV)  and  Colonel  Alfons  Broz  (then  7602nd  Commander  under  which 
the  directorate  operated)  heartily  endorsed  the  "selling"  of  SERE 
Guides  to  field  units  —  especially  MAJCOMs  and  other  services.  The 
directorate  began  budgeting  for  SERE  Guide  assistance  visits  to 
MAJCOMs  and  other  service  recipients  during  FY  78.  On  the  average, 
four  trips  per  fiscal  year  had  been  scheduled;  however,  none  were 
completed. l& 
The  idea  of  advertising  SERE  Guides  and  the  need  for 
personal  interaction  between  AFIS  and  units  in  the  field  had  also  been 
endorsed  by  the  ACS/ I.  When  the  directorate  came  under  the  7602nd, 
the  command  section  felt  that  the  trips  should  be  performed  at  the 
Executive  Staff  level.  The  directorate  did  not  then  nor  during  1982 
have  staff  level  personnel  promote  SERE  guides  at  that  level.  Colonel 
Webb  believed  this  was  a  major  obstacle  to  sending  SERE  Branch 
personnel  on  these  trips.  In  addition,  the  funds  budgeted  for  this 
purpose  were  easily  diverted  to  other  unscheduled  unbudgeted  TDY's  in 
support  of  other  programs. 134 
(B  Tne  need  to  promote  SERE  guides  remained  evident  throughout 
1982.  The  directorate  needed  an  interface  with  other  commands  and 
services  on  SERE  guide  use  and  distribution.  Colonel  Webb  believed 
that  questions  and  problems  that  occurred  could  have  been  avoided  if 
that  interface  existed.-3-' 
Mw  As  a  stop-ga?  measure,  the  directorate  produced  a  video  tape 
on  SERE  Guides  in  June  1980.  This  was  intended  to  enlighten  users 
until  a  visit  could  be  made.  It  was  also  intended  as  a  tool  to  be 
used  in  staff  assistance  visits.  The  end  results  were  less  than 
completely  satisfactory;  making  the  video  tape  available  to  other 
services  was  difficult.  Even  in  the  Air  Force,  it  was  a  chore  to 
determine  the  actual  availability  of  the  video  tape  to  the  squadron 
level  units.  Colonel  Webb  believed  that  a  personal  visit  by  the  INR 
staff  would  answer  many  questions  raised  by  personnel  at  command 
distribution  points. i3D 
DEFENSE  SUPPORT  PROGRAMS 
The  Defense  Support  Programs  Division  (INRB] 
ATFTorce  Intelligence 
and  development  (R&D) 
INRB"  provio?c,  when  ^requested"  by 
AF/IN),  technical  recommendations  and  research 
support  to  HUMINT  and  HUMINT-related  (Foreign 
£ 
VJ 
CO 
a. 
#
103 
Material  Exploitation)  activities,  and  provided  Air  Force  augmentation 
to  and  management  of  the  Combined  Services  Support  Program  (CSSP). 
   During  1982,  the  division  worked  toward  its  goal  of  maximum 
wartime  readiness  by  actively  pursuing  the  following  objectives: 
increased  productivity,  active  program  management,  and  operational 
autonomy.  Although  significant  gains  were  achieved  in  each  of  these 
areas  by  the  end  of  the  year,  various  factors  (indicated  earlier) 
limited  progress  to  the  extent  desired. 138 
_  Efforts  to  increase  productivity  during  1982  concentrated  on 
improving  the  division's  effectiveness  and  efficiency  through 
technological  applications,  training  in  time  management,  use  of 
Quality  Circles,  increased  personnel  motivation  and  improved 
interpersonal  cormiunications.139 
4B  During  the  summer  of  1982,  the  division  installed  two 
modified  Xerox  860T  Information  Processing  Systems  in  the  CSSP  branch 
and  the  four  analysts  undertook  and  completed  an  intense  user  training 
program.  Although  the  two  units  represented  less  than  half  the 
desired  hardware  for  one  complete  system  (i.e.  Cathode  Ray  Tube  (CRT), 
keyboard,  controller  and  printer  per  analyst),  substantial  increases 
in  individual  productivity  were  recorded  following  the  training  period 
and  implementation.  Steps  were  taken  to  procure  two  more  specially 
modified  Xerox  860T  systems  in  FY  83  to  bring  the  CSSP  branch  up  to 
near  full  capability.  The  increased  rate  of  production  realized 
following  the  introduction  of  Phase  I  automation  for  the  CSSP  branch 
was  not  a  result  of  technological  applications  alone  --  motivation  of 
personnel  played  a  significant  role  too.  Prior  to  mid-1982,  the 
methods  of  providing  program  reports  involved  "a  constantly  high  level 
of  concentration,  continuous  repetition  with  little  variation,  and  low 
levels  of  excitement  combined  with  a  depressing  frame  of  reference 
(i.e.  they  would  only  produce  around  18  percent  of  the  desired 
productivity). "140 
    The  analyst  knew  that  no  matter  how  hard  they  worked,  they 
would  ne^er  achieve  their  desired  goals.  The  introduction  of  modern 
automated  data  processing  techniques  to  CSSP  operations  showed  that 
these  limitations  could  be  overcome  and  that  it  would  be  possible  to 
effectively  and  efficiently  handle  the  increasing  workload  given  the 
proper  equipment  and  organization  skills.  Personnel  motivation 
increased  because  the  analysts  became  aware  that  better  services  could 
be  provided  with  less  difficulty,  which  in  turn  boosted  the  morale  of 
program  participants  and  increased  wartime  readiness. m 
Personnel  motivation  was  also  addressed  through  the 
management  technique  of  goal  setting.  In  directorate  staff  meetings, 
INRB  division  meetings  and  quality  circles,  Major  Robert  G.  Dussault 
encouraged  the  setting  of  personal,  branch,  and  division  goals  and 
provided  expert  information  on  how  to  successfully  apply  the  goal 
setting  process.  Major  Dussault  pointed  out  that  setting  and  working 
toward   a   high,   but   realistically   attainable   goal   stimulated
10- 
excitement,   motivation   and   effort   as   well 
satisfaction  once  the  goal  had  been  achieved. A^ 
as   great   personal 
attention 
tt.is  was 
Circle. 
Another  aspect  of  increased  productivity  which  received 
in  1932  was  enhanced  interpersonal  communications,  in  INRB, 
carried  out  by  tne  technique  of  the  Quality  Control  (QC) 
Essentially,  the  Q.C.  Circle  involved  a  small  group  of 
employees,  usually  from  the  same  group  who  voluntarily  met  on  a 
regular  basis  to  discuss  quality  problems,  investigate  causes, 
recommend  solutions  and  implement  these  solutions  when  possible.  The 
thrust  of  the  concept  was  aimed  at  giving  the  worker  dignity.  In  INRB 
this  was  done  by  recognizing  that  its  people  were  creative;  that  they 
had  valuable  ideas;  and  that  they  could  recognize  their  own  problems 
and  suggest  solutions  to  them  if  given  the  opportunity. 143 
•  Q7C. 
Following  the  start  of  the  Q.C.  Circle  program  in  March, 
four  Q.C.  Circles  were  held  involving  INRB  personnel.  Major  Dussault 
personally  guided  each  Q.C.  Circle  discussion  by  establishing  policies 
and  procedures  and  assisting  in  problem  solving  when  required.  As  a 
result  of  this  initiative,  new  standards  and  policies  were  adopted  by 
INRB  which  reflected  the  desires  of  the  employees.  These  included: 
set  schedules  for  daily  activities,  limitations  on  interruptions, 
daily  production  goals,  an  agreed  sequence  of  work-flow  events  and 
improved  time  management. A^ 
(Chriolo 
Overall,  Colonel  Webb  believed  the  three  initiatives 
(technological  applications,  increased  motivation  of  personnel  and 
improved  interpersonal  communications)  produced  the  desired  result  of 
increased  productivity.  For  example,  a  comparison  of  the  number  of 
product  reports  sent  out  by  the  CSSP  branch  of  INRB  in  1981  and  1982 
showed  that  productivity  increased  by  39  percent  in  1982.  This  gain 
was  realized  despite  reduced  manning  in  the  CSSP  branch  for 
approximately  803  manhours  and  the  non-production  time  set  aside  for 
training  the  analysts 
Xerox. 
CM 
m 
* 
S3 
m 
w 
o. 
« 
0) 
o
105 
i  in  f During  1982,  INRB  worked  more  closely  with  the  Air  Staff 
than  TrT  previous  years.  In  fact,  INRB  was  considered  by  AF/IN  to  be 
the  Air  Staff  action  officer  for  E&E/PW  and  related  activities.  By 
opening  the  lines  of  communication,  the  division  achieved  a  greater 
understanding  and  increased  awareness  by  key  personnel  of  INRB's 
mission  and  the   unique   prnblpms   it   far.prl  in   fulfilling   it«g rnjpj 
« 
Two  projects  were  completed  and  delivered  to  INRB  during  the 
year.  "One  of  these,  £  B  came  in  ahead  of  schedule  and  under  cost. 
Colonel  Webb  attributed  success  in  these  two  efforts  to  active  program 
management  on  the  part  of  INRB  personnel. 150 
« 
m 
/I 
Cfl 
M 
0) 
O. 
o 
*j 
0) 
r-t 
0) 
P
0*= 
SOVIET  AFFAIRS 
Mission  and  Qrcar.i  zati  or 
^^^  The  mission  of  the  Directorate  of  Soviet  Affairs  (AFIS/INC) 
as  diTected  by  the  Chief  of  Staff,  USAF,  was  to  keep  "each  member  of 
the  Air  Force  informed  and  aware  of  Soviet  doctrine,  strategy, 
tactics,  force  structure  and  combat  employment."  The  Chief  of  Staff 
desired  a  "Soviet  Awareness  Program"  which  would  present 
comprehensive,  objective  information  about  the  Soviet  Union  and  its 
armed  forces  relying  primarily  upon  information  and  estimates  from  the 
intelligence  community.  This  was  a  unique  irission  for  an  intelligence 
organization  in  the  sense  that  classified  information  was  deliberately 
made  available  to  as  many  appropriately  cleared  people  as  possible.153 
fl&    The  Directorate   of   Soviet  Affairs  was  formed  to  conduct  the 
USAF  soviet  Awareness  Progra".  Two  primary  mediums  were  used:  the 
printed  word  in  the  form"  of  edited  translations  of  Soviet  military 
writings  and  the  spoken  word  in  the  form  of  oral  presentations  and 
videotape  programs.  AFIS/INC  consisted  of  two  divisions:  the 
Literature  Research  Li  vision  (INCF)  handled  the  written  medium  and  the 
Soviet  Awareness  Division  (I NCR)  handled  the  spoken.  The  directorate 
also  maintained  a  Literature  Research  Facility  and  a  display  of  Soviet 
artifacts.15* 
Literature  Research 
The  Literature  Research  Division  (INCF),  after  experiencing 
a  long  period  of  several  vacant  manpower  positions,  finally  managed  • 
achieve  a  full  st=*f  o'  editors  and  translators  in  April. 
Consequently,  INCF  spent  much  of  19S2  trying  to  bring  all  publication 
up  to  date  --  particularly  AFR?  200-1,  Soviet  Press  Selected 
Translations.  The  division  made  significant  progress  in  this  ares- 
They  were  also  able  to  make  significant  progress  in  improving  the 
content  and  Quality  o*  publications,  and  arranging  for  less  costly  and 
more  reliable  publication  and  printing  procedures.  The  Division's 
Technical  Information  Specialist  continued  his  extensive  research  on 
Soviet  Logistics  and  anticipated  that  the  study  would  be  concluded  in 
19S3.  In  addition,  he  completed  studies  on  Soviet  Armed  forces 
political  elements,  young  people's  military  exercises,  and  the  Soviet 
Armed  Forces   legal   system.1^ 
flfi  No  "Soviet  f-'ilitary  Thought"  volumes  were  published  in  1982, 
primarily  because  of  delays  caused  by  contractors  doino  a  poor  job  on 
the  proofs  for  Volume  17,  The  Command  and  Staff  of  the  Soviet  Army  Air 
Force  in  the  Great  Patriotic  War,    1941-1945.  However,       the       book 
editors  did  make  progress  with  Volume  17   as  well   as   Volumes  18  and  19, 
and  publication  cf   all   three  volumes  was  anticipated  for  1983. 156 
flfc     Late    in    192?    the    Air    Force    acquired    an    automated    printinq 
capab^iny,    which   Colonel   Wish  believed  would   sianif icantly  reduce   the
107 
ensure  a  higher 
Fundamentals  of 
time  reauired  to  Drepare  publications  for  printinc  and 
quality  product.    The  manuscript  for  Volume  IS,    
Tactical  Command  and  Control,  was  submitted  for  preparation  of  proofs 
in  October.   It  was  scheduled  to  be  the  first  volume  printed  by 
automation. 157 
Selec cB 
Volume  Five  in  the  "Studies  in  Communist  Affairs"  series, 
Readings  from  Military  Thought,  was  published  in  1982.   This 
published  in  two  parts.  Part  I  in  April  and  Part  II  in 
manuscript  for  Volume  Six,  The  Soviet  Union:  What  Lies 
volume  was 
October.   The 
Ahead  ?,  was  submitted  for  preparation  of  proofs  in  December  1982  and 
publication  was  anticipated  for  1983.  This  volume  consisted  of  notes 
from  the  Assistant  Chief  of  Staff,  Intelliqence,  Headquarters  USAF, 
October  1981  Conference  on  the  Soviet  Union. 158 
     The  AFRP  200-1,   Soviet  Press  Selected  Translations 
publication  had  fallen  furthest  behind  schedule  due  to  vacant  manpower 
slots.  Yet,  by  the  end  of  1982  the  publication  was  almost  back  on 
schedule.  Seven  issues  were  published  with  the  final  two  issues 
expected  to  be  completed  in  early  1983.159 
The  costs  of  printing  this  publication  were  reduced  by 
incorporating  design  and  layout  changes.  The  result  was  more  material 
printed  on  less  pages  in  a  more  visually  attractive  manner.  The 
content  of  each  issue  was  also  improved  by  including  a  more 
comprehensive  selection  of  current  Soviet  writings  on  military  and 
political  affairs.  169 
_  The  AFRP  200-1  was  a  monthly  publication  until  November  . 
At  that  time  the  Secretary  of  the  Air  Force,  based  upon  the 
recommendations  of  tne  Headquarters  USAF  Periodical  Review  Board,  cut 
AFRP  200-1  to  a  bimonthly  publication  effective  with  the  first  issue 
in  19S3.  This  was  Dart  of  alaraer  effort  to  cut  back  on  the  costs  of 
all  Air  Force  publications. 1°1 
publ 
m 
1 1  shec 
The  number  of  Soviet  Military  Concepts  (SMC)  issues 
d  in  1932  was  down  from  previous  years  because  the  SMC  editor 
had  to  support  AFRP  200-1  for  several  months.  Nevertheless,  three 
issues  were  published  in  1982  and  work  beaan  on  multiple  issues  on 
Electronic  Warfare. 162 
•Y^^s^. 
ST:'  •«    7 
»V5sf-.t  ,.*-*  --*5»-."-V«  ■:'  •*  r-   ;<!*-«*  ,-.-5 
•ft 
o 
p 
p. 
v 
V 
•H 
0) 
P
10r 
Soviet  Awareness 
The  Soviet  Awareness  Division  (AFIS/INCR)  had  a  very 
productive  year  in  19S2,  despite  a  large  turnover  in  personnel.  In 
addition  to  a  ne*  division  cnief  and  director  of  curriculum  arriving 
in  1982,  there  were  four  other  losses  and  five  other  gains  in  INCR. 
Filling  INCR  vacancies  with  qualified  personnel  remained  one  of  the 
directorate's  most  vexing  problems  and  the  shortage  of  qualified 
personnel  remained  the  most  significant  obstacle  in  the  way  of 
increased  productivity.-"4 
AFIS/INCR  conducted  12  Soviet  Military  Power  Week  (SMPW) 
courses,  visited  36  Air  Force  bases  with  the  Soviet  Awareness 
Roadshow,  conducted  five  Soviet  Military  Power  Days  (SMPD)  at  Boiling 
AFB  and  presented  19  special  programs.  The  division  maintained  its 
usual  support  fo"  Air  Training  Command,  including  Underaraduate  Pilot 
and  Navigator  Training,  Air  War  College,  Squadron  Officer  School  and 
Air  Command  and  Staff  College.  Additionally,  INCR  supported  the  Armed 
Forces  Staff  Collece  at  Norfolk,  Virginia,  the  Industrial  College  of 
the  Armed  Forces  at  National  Defense  University  and  the  Uniformed 
Services  University  of  the  Health  Sciences.  "  Once  again  Soviet 
Awareness  was  included  in  the  orientation  course  for  all  new  Air  Force 
brigadier  generals,  as  well  as  the  new  Marine  Corp  brigadier 
generals. 165 
During  19S2,  there  were  three  special  programs  of  particular 
significance.  On  21  January,  Senator  John  Werner  of  Virginia  and  his 
staff  came  to  the  INC  auditorium  for  a  four-hour  program.  A  two-day 
program  for  Congressional  and  White  house  staffers  was  conducted  on 
the  weekend  of  17-18  April.  Finally,  INCR  gave  the  Reserve  Forces 
Policy  Board  an  eight-hour  program  on  15  June.  The  response  to  all 
three  of  these  programs  was  quite  favorable. 166 
ft 
'■•■"■'XK* 
■ » -:r 
"        f- 'v.     .'  .-'  ■ 
'«r  •     ^>  ..         .  -     — 
content  of  its 
SMPDs  and  all 
presentations, 
In  January,  INCR  made  a  major  change  in  the 
presentations  on  Soviet  military  forces  for  SMPWs, 
roadshows.  The  change  involved  creating  two  new 
"Soviet  Readiness  for  War"  an;J  "  Intercontinental  War,"  and 
restructuring  an  existing  presentation,  "Theater  War."  With  this 
change,  INCR  was  better  able  to  present  an  accurate  view  of  Soviet 
doctrine  and  strateay,  and  explain  how  the  Soviets  would  use  their 
armed  forces  to  fight  any  level  of  conflict,  conventional  through 
nuclear.  Colonel  Wish  believed  this  new  method  of  covering  the  Soviet 
armed  forces  was  far  more   lively,   motivational   and  educational, 168 
o 
CA 
P 
u 
0) 
« 
u O 
o
109 
■P  The  Soviet  Awareness  Division  experienced  one  significant 
setbacx  with  its  Roadshow.  Half  of  a  scheduled  deployment  to  bases  in 
the  Pacific  area  in  October  was  cancelled  just  a  few  weeks  prior  to 
the  Soviet  Awareness  Tean's  scheduled  departure.  This  cancellation 
was  disappointing  because  it  occurred  after  several  months  of  planning 
and  coordination  The  main  problem  was  a  lack  of  coordination  between 
INCR's  point  of  contact  at  Pacific  Air  Forces,  Hickam  AFB  and  the 
commanders  at  bases  in  Japan  and  South  Korea.  The  deployment  to  four 
bases  in  these  countries  was  cancelled  but  the  team  did  make  it  to 
other  bases  in  Okinawa,  the  Phi  Hi  pines  and  Guam. I69 
    Colonel  Wish  was  once  again  able  to  send  people  to  the 
Soviet  Union  for  an  orientation  visit  in  1982.  This  had  been  an 
important  program  for  the  directorate  and  had  produced  some  lucrative 
benefits.  The  opportunity  to  see  the  Soviet  Union  firsthand  had 
greatly  enhanced  each  individual's  understanding  of  the  Soviet  Union 
and  had  helped  maintain  the  overall  credibility  of  the  Soviet 
Awareness  Program.  There  were  many  additional  benefits  such  as  good 
quality  color  photography  for  use  in  the  presentations,  and  excellent 
posters  and  other  artifacts  for  use  in  the  directorate's  programs. 170 
   The  1982  orientation  visit  was  successful  despite  some  major 
disappointments.  Four  individuals  made  the  trip--three  from  INCR  and 
one  from  the  Soviet  Studies  Branch,  Strategic  Studies  Division 
(AF/INESS).  They  spent  two  weeks  in  the  Soviet  Union  (1-15  July). 
Unfortunately  almost  all  of  that  time  was  spent  in  Moscow.  Soviet 
officials,  for  whatever  reason,  chose  to  disapprove  almost  all  travel 
requests  outside  of  Moscow.  Finally,  on  the  day  before  the  end  of  the 
trip,  the  Soviets  approved  a  one-day  visit  to  Leningrad.  Otherwise, 
Colonel  Wish  considered  the  trip  a  success. 171 
Special  Problems 
    The  one  factor  which  most  limited  the  effectiveness  of  the 
Soviet  Awareness  Program  was  the  absence  of  a  sufficient  number  of 
qualified,  exoerienced  personnel.   The  lack  of  nualified  editors  and 
translators  for  INCF  seriously  disrupted  their  publications.   Due  to 
inadequate  manpower  positions  and  the  shortage  of  aualified  personnel, 
INCR  was  unable  to  achieve  a  two-team  capability.   The  directorate 
worked  to  acquire  qualified  personnel  by  once  again  selecting  an 
individual  to  send  into  the  Area  Specialist  Program.'  After  two  years 
of  studying  Soviet  Affairs  and  the  Russian  lanquage  the  individual 
would  hopefully  receive  a  follow-on  assignment  to  INC.  The  first  INC- 
selected  area  specialist  was  expected  to  be  assigned  to  INCR  in  July 
1983.172 
    Additionally,  INC  reauested,  as  a  part  of  the  FY  85-89 
Program  Objective  Memorandum  (POM)  and  Budget  process,  additional 
manpower  slots,  an  expanded  word  processing  capability  and  renovation 
of  the  display  facility.  The  highest  priority  was  the  additional 
manpower  slots  for  INCR.  The  division  would  never  have  a  two-team 
capability  unless  additional  manpower  slots  were  authorized.   The  main
n 
benefit  of  haviro  U:  tears  was  quite  simple:  the  ability  to  inform 
more  Air  Force  members  about  the  Soviet  Union  (which  was  INC's  primary 
mission).  The  request  for  an  additional  slot  for  INCF  was  negated  by 
the  decision  tc  reduce  AFR?  200-1  to  a  bimonthly  publication. 173 
_  Colonel  Wish  also  requested  additional  terminals  for  the 
MiCOM  word  processing  system  in  the  FY  85  POM  input.  With  additional 
terminals,  the  INCF  editors  would  be  able  to  edit  and  correct 
manuscripts  directly  at  a  terminal  rather  than  relying  upon  support 
from  administrative  personnel.  This  would  reduce  the'  time  required 
for  preparing  publications  and  lessen  the  load  on  the  administrative 
personnel.  Also,  a  greater  share  of  the  directorate's  overall 
administrative  tasks  could  be  performed  on  the  word  processor.  With 
the  extra  terminals,  the  directorate  would  require  one  less 
administrative  manpower  slot.*75 
flp  The  directorate  began  significant  actions  to  improve  and 
renovate  the  Soviet  display  facility.  Several  new  artifacts  were 
acquired  in  195?  and  placed  in  the  facility.  However,  the  most  urgent 
task  was  the  renovation  o*  the  entire  facility.  Located  in  a  large 
noisy  warehouse  which  was  populated  by  many  birds,  the  display  area 
was  unattractive  and  difficult  to  keen  clean.  Consequently,  INC 
requested  funds  in  the  FY  85  POM  input  for  renovation  and  also 
submitted  a  request  to  the  Base  Civil  Engineer  to  have  the  area 
enclosed  within  higner  walls  and  a  ceiling.  175 
    Finally,  INC  began  a  major  upgrade  of  its  audiovisual 
equipment  for  the  auditorium.  A  new  Sony  large  screen  video 
projection  syster  was  installed  in  March  to  replace  the  worn  out 
Advent  system.  Orders  were  placed  for  replacement  videocassette 
players  and  slide  projectors.  New  equipment,  such  as  a  professional 
sound  mixer,  microphones,  amplifiers  and  a  cassette  deck,  were  also 
ordered.  Some  of  this  eauipment  was  purchased  in  19S2  and  the 
remainder  was  expected  in  1953.  With  the  installation  of  the  new 
equipment,  the  audiovisual  functions  for  the  auditorium  would  be 
significantly  improved.-1'' 
OPERATING  LOCATION  AF 
Mission  and  Oraanization 
_  The  AFIS  Operating  Location  AF  (AFIS  OL-AF),  in  its  liaison 
capacity  to  the  Air  Force  Test  and  Evaluation  Center  (AFTEC),  had  been 
in  existence  for  nearly  two  years  .-.(establ ished  in  April  1981).  The  0L 
supported  AFTEC  by  providing  intelligence  personnel  augmentation  for 
dedicated  all-source  intelligence  management  and  limited  analytical 
support.  Additional  responsibilities  included  serving  as  a  liaison 
between  AFTEC  and  other  Air  Force  intelligence  organizations  to  ensure 
all-source  intelligence  support  for  the  AFTEC  mission;  assisting  in 
the  review  of  threat  assessments  and  scenarios  for  adequacy, 
completeness  and  applicability;  assisting  in  the  review  of  Threat 
Environment   Descriptions   (TEDs)   for   currency   and   completeness, 
i
Ill 
identifying  neeas  and  recommending  intelligence  support  for  the  AFTEC 
operational  test  and  evaluation  (OT&E)  mission;  assisting  in  the 
resolution  of  critical  conflicting  intelligence  data  which  could 
impact  on  the  AFTEC  mission;  and  assisting  AFTEC  in  developing  and 
maintainina  a  collateral  intelligence  library  by  identifying 
appropriate  intelligence  publications.  *-77 
M  fe  Manning  authorizations  for  the  OL  remained  stable  throughout 
the  ySr.  Lieutenant  Colonel  Donald  N.  Walker  continued  as  Chief  and 
Major  Richard  A.  Puseman  as  Operations  Officer.  A  third  officer 
position  was  authorized  in  May  (Captain,  Intelligence  Applications 
Officer,  Air  Force  Specialty  Code  3075);  however,  the  position 
remained  vacant.  Colonel  Walker  believed  the  position  would  be  filled 
in  1983.178 
Significant  Projects 
flfc  Throughout  1982,  the  OL  continued  to  provide  Air  Force  and 
Defence  Intelligence  Agency  (DIA)  validated  intelligence  to  AFTEC  test 
managers  and  test  teams  in  suDport  of  worldwide  OT&E  projects. 
Specific  highlights  included  threat  support  to  such  high  level 
projects  as  the  Missile-X  (M-X),  Ground  Launched  Cruise  Missile 
(GLCM),  ALR-74  Warning  Receiver,  Precision  Location  Strike  System 
(PLSS),  Joint  Tactical  Fusion  Program  (OTFP),  Mobile  Ground  Terminal 
(MGT),  Low  Level  Laser  Guided  Bomb  (LLLGB),  Military  Satellite 
Communications   (MILSATCOM),   EF-111,   and  others. lr9 
^^^  Most  efforts  involved  coordinating  the  information  flow 
betweerT AFTEC  staff  and  the  Air  Force  Intelligence  (AF/IN)  analysts. 
Many  interfaces  were  successful,  such  as  acquiring  real  world 
information  in  support  of  GLCM  test  launches;  obtaining  a  detailed, 
tailored  threat  package  for  the  PLSS;  providing  expertise  and 
intelligence  advice  for  JTFP  test  planning;    and  providing  the  MGT  test 
*  Although  physically  located  at  Kirtland  AFB,  New  Mexico, 
organizationally,  AFIS  OL-AF  worked  directly  for  the  Air  Force 
Electronic  Combat  Intelligence  Group  (AF/INW)  at  the  Pentagon.  The  OL 
directly  supported  AFTEC  requirements.  AFTEC  was  an  independent 
separate  operating  agency  (located  at  Kirtland  AFB)  who  managed  the 
Air  Force  OT&E  program  according  to  Air  Force  oolicy.  It  was  the 
principal  agency  which  furnished  OT&E  information  to  the  Air  Force 
Chief  of  Staff,  the  Secretary  of  the  Air  Force,  and  in  turn,  the 
Office  of  the  Secretary  of  Defense  and  the  Congress.  The  AFTEC 
planned,  directed,  controlled,  evaluated,  and  reported  on  OT&E 
projects,  and  recommended  OT&E  policy  to  Headquarters  United  States 
Air  Force  (USAF).  One  major  concern  was  to  ensure  that  test  managers 
used  current  validated  intelligence  which  would  meet  the  scrutiny  of 
Air  Force  System  Acquisition  Review  Council  and  Defense  System 
Acquisition  Review  Council   (AFSARC/DSARC)   panels.
n: 
tear;  with  specific  taraetinc  information  from  the  Joint  Chief  of 
Staff's  Studies  Analysis  and  Gatina  Agency  (SAGA).  However,  not  all 
efforts  met  with  qreat  success.  Specific  uodates  to  GLCM  threat 
allocation  study  were  promised  for  over  a  year,  then  the  study  was  not 
validated,  and  the  AFTEC  reouest  was  finally  withdrawn;  the  current 
status  of  Threat  Assessment  Reports  and  Threat  Environment 
Descriptions  (TARs  and  TEDs)  were  still  difficult  for  test  planners  to 
obtain;  and  no  formal  management  structure  existed  to  help  provide 
dedicated  intelligence  support  for  the  testing  and  acquisition 
communities  --  even  after  numerous  meetings  and  messages  on  the 
subject. 180 
flR  At  the  request  of  the  AFTEC  Plans  Division  (AFTEC/XP),  AF1S 
OL-AF^^egan  a  project  or,  Precision  Location  Strike  System  (PLSS) 
threat  support.  The  primary  goal  was  to  fill  perceived  gaps  in 
existing  PlSS  threat  data.  Initially,  message  traffic  between  OL-AF, 
the  Air  Force  Intelligence  General  Threat  Division  (AF/INEG),  AFIS  0L- 
N,  anJ  the  Foreign  Technology  Division  (FTD)  provided  some  of  the 
needed  answers.  However,  the  real  issues  concerning  contractual 
responsibility  for  threat  data,  the  level  of  parametric  detail  needed 
to  support  P;_SS,  data  link  vulnerability,  ground  station 
vulnerability,  pulse  densities  affecting  receivers,  and  future  Soviet 
spread  spectrum  capability  still  had  not  been  adequately  addressed. 181 
■H  To  obtain  the  needed  information,  OL-AF  in  conjunction  with 
AFTEC/XP/TE  hosted  a  PLSS  intelligence  support  conference  with 
representatives  from  AF/INEG,  AFIS  OL-N,  AFSC/INA,  and  FTD.  The  main 
objectives  were  to  allow  the  PLSS  test  community  to  directly  interface 
with  the  various  intelligence  organizations  and  to  assign  specific 
offices  of  primary  resoonsibi 1 ity  (OPRs)  to  obtain  the  required 
information.  The  meeting  took  place  on  9-10  November  with  a  final 
product  conoi  led  by  AF/INEG  by  the  end  of  the  year.  The  AFTEC  test 
director  was  extremely  pleased  with  the  threat  package  and  passed  his 
thanks  to  all  who  provided  inputs.  Overall,  Colonel  Walker  believed 
this  was  an  extremely  productive  effort  which  greatly  enhanced  the 
working  relationships  among  AFTEC,  AFIS  OL-AF,  and  the  intelligence 
community  in  general. 18- 
^^  Support  to  the  Ground  Launch  Cruise  Missile  (GLCM)  program 
involved  two  distinct  phases  --  first,  through  direct  interface 
between  the  AFIS  Intelligence  Research  Division  (INOI)  and  the  GLCM 
test  team  to  confirm  the  presence  of  real  world  friendly  collection 
resources  directed  against  GLCM  launches;  and  secondly,  through 
reconnaissance  support  and  Air  -.Staff  augmentation  for  a  deployment 
exercise  in  the  Northwestern  United  States.  In  early  June,  OL-AF 
members  visited  the  GLCM  test  team  to  gain  insight  into  actual  test 
environment  conditions  and  to  determine  the  best  means  of  providing 
support  for  future  launches. 183 
Throughout  the  year,  AFTEC  voiced  several  concerns  about  the 
development  of  the  ALR-74  Warning  Receiver  threat.  Early  threat 
working   group   (TW3)   meetings,   message   traffic,   and  telephone
113 
conversations  did  not  seem  to  adeauately  address  several  major  issues. 
These  included  an  apparent  lack  of  operational  threat  data;  the 
credibility  of  a  threat  definition  which  was  basically  built  by  the 
developer;  and  insufficient  TWG  representation  from  the  intelligence 
communities  scientific  and  technical  experts. 184 
    During  a  follow-on  threat  working  group  (TWG)  meeting  in 
June7~several  of  the  open  items  were  resolved.  Specifically,  the 
group  recommended:  (1)  the  Electronic  Combat  (EC)  Threat  Environment 
Description  (TED)  and  Electronic  Warfare  Integrated  Reprogramming 
(EWIR)  data  base  should  be  used  as  the  baseline  sources  for  the  ALR-74 
threat  data;  (2)  the  Air  Force  Electronic  Intelligence  Group  (AF/INW) 
would  validate  all  threat  information  used  for  the  ALR-74  program;  (3) 
the  initial  threat  data  base  would  support  only  prototype  ALR-74  (not 
the  production  ALR-74);  and  (4)  the  Electronic  Warfare  Open  Loop 
Simulator  (EWOLS)  could  be  used  to  satisfy  many  of  the  threat  density 
requirements  for  testing.  The  remaining  focus  centered  on  defining 
those  gaps  in  tactical  type  information  not  found  in  the  ERIR  data 
base  or  EC  TED. 185 
f§Mk  The  Joint  Tactical  Fusion  Program  (JTFP)  evolved  from  the 
Battlefield  Exploitation  and  Target  Acquisition  (BETA)  project  and  was 
jointly  sponsored  by  the  Air  Force  and  Army.  Testing  of  fusion 
capabilities  was  scheduled  to  continue  through  1933  and  possibly  1984 
with  a  major  Air  Force  effort  planned  for  Europe  (Limited  Operational 
Capability  Europe  (LOCE)).  In  June,  the  AFTEC  test  manager  for  JTFP, 
augmented  by  AFIS  OL-AF,  observed  portions  of  the  Phase  I  Initial 
Operational  Test  and  Evaluation  ( IOT&E)  at  Hurlburt  Field,  Florida. 
Large  volumes  of  data  were  fed  into  the  Joint  Fusion  Test  Bed  (JTFTB) 
from  outside  connecting  elements  to  stress  the  system's  software 
correlation  algorithms.  Final  evaluation  of  the  Phase  I  test  could 
not  be  made  until  all  the  data  had  been  analyzed,  but  initial  results 
were  promisinq  and  would  be  beneficial  for  the  LOCE  effort  in  late 
Fiscal  Year  (FY)  83. IBS 
^^  To  help  accomplish  advanced  threat  realism  planninq  for 
Mi-litary  Satellite  Communications  (MILSTAR)  OT&E,  AFTEC/XPQ  requested 
the  development  of  a  postulated  electronic  warfare  (EW)  environment  to 
realistically  reflect  the  employment  and  deployment  of  enemy  EW 
assets.  The  June  1932  reauest  asked  for  the  application  of  the  EW 
assets  listed  in  the  MILSTAR  System  Threat  Assessment  Report  (STAR) 
and  SPACE  TED  into  realistic  operational  scenarios  for  crisis  and 
conventional/nuclear  environments.  The  tasking  was  directed  to  AFIS 
OL-N,  San  Antonio,  Texas,  through  the  Air  Force  Electronic  Combat 
Intelligence  Group  (AF/INW)  at  the  Pentagon.  In  support,  OL-AF 
developed  and  provided  an  initial  project  outline  to  AFTEC.  By  late 
July,  portions  of  the  MILSTAR  STAR  final  draft  were  provided  to  AFIS 
OL-AF  and  AFTEC  to  determine  if  this  document  would  satisfy  the 
majority  of  tasking.  After  reviewing  this  draft  and  another 
applicable  Defense  Intelligence  Agency  (DIA)  document  titled  Soviet 
Threat  to  Military  Satellite  Communications,  it  was  determined  that 
much  of  U.e  required  information  was  available  in  these  documents.
11* 
However,  seme  ar-as  regained  in  which  AFTEC  would  neei  some  assistance 
--  particularly  ir  developing  a  realistic  and  feasible  application  to 
the  testing  process. It*" 
Vflfc  The  final  sianifica.nt  project  involved  the  establishment  of 
a  for^ln  DIA  threat  liprarv  account  by  May  1982.  With  the  creation  of 
the  account,  initial  ordering  of  recurring  collateral  intelligence 
publications  began.  Subsequently,  AFTEC  developed  a  computerized 
system  for  handling  their  overall  m-house  administrative  workload  and 
took  action  to  set-up  and  maintain  an  accurate,  more  easily  accessible 
intelligence  data  bank  using  their  computer  terminal.  Operational 
Test  and  Evaluation  (OT&E)  planners  now  had  a  more  comprehensive  and 
controllable  library  to  meet  their  needs. 188 
Specific  Problem  Areas 
||  l|  Three  major  problem  areas  occurred  during  the  year.  First, 
the  Tack  of  an  Air  Force  regulation  defining  the  management  structure 
and  responsibilities  fc-  intellioence  support  to  the  acquisition 
process.  Although  some  progress  had  been  made,  a  regulation  still  did 
not  exist.  The  AFTEC  had  requested  support  in  this  area  prior  to  and 
since  the  establishment  of  AF IS  OL-A^.  A  regulation  of  this  type 
remained  vital  to  ensure  that  accurate  and  current  intelligence  data 
was  made  available  to  support  AFTEC  efforts  and  to  avoid  unnecessary 
duplication.  Often  AFTEC  tested  new  or  developing  systems  which  would 
be  used  five  to  ten  years  in  the  future.  If  the  intelligence 
supporting  these  tests  was  not  accurate  or  keyed  to  the  current  and 
future  threat,  the  new  and  developing  systems  would  not  only  be  "shot 
down"  by  the  Air  Force  System  Acquisition  Review  Council  and  Defense 
System  Acquisition  Review  Council  (AFSARC/DSARC)  Panels,  but  could 
also  be  "shot  down"  by  the  enemy  as  well.  Colonel  Walker  believed 
that  an  intelligence  support  regulation  would  help  solve  this 
problem. 1S9 
-e^^  A  second  anu  somewnat  parallel  problem  was  the  need  to  track 
the  status  of  TARs  and  TEDs  and  provide  this  information  to  AFTEC. 
AFTEC  used  these  documents  as  the  official  validated  intelligence 
source  for  many  of  its  test  programs.  Again,  some  progress  had  been 
made;  however,  several  requests  were  needed  to  obtain  the  information. 
Colonel  Walker  believed  that  this  type  of  information  should  be 
updated  periodically  without  continuous  prodding  from  the  using 
community.  In  the  final  analysis,  AFTEC  needed  to  kntw  what  validated 
intelligence  products  should  be  used  to  support  each  OT&E  program.  In 
some  cases  a  TAR  had  already  been  developed;  in  other  cases,  TARs  or 
TEDs  were  being  developed;  and  in  still  other  cases,  one  or  more 
different  intelligence  documents  (NON-TARS/TEDs)  were  being  used  in 
place  of  a  validated  TAR.  A  managed,  controlled  program  which  tracked 
current  TAR/TED  status  continued  to  be  vital  to  an  organized  OT&E 
effort  by  the  Air  Force. *?9 
The  third  problem  involved  the  general  issue  of  scoping  the 
approprTate  level  of  intelligence  support  to  AFTEC.   During  the  year,
115 
several  discussions  and  meetings  occurred  between  the  Air  Staff,  AFIS 
OL-AF,  and  the  AFTEC  staff  in  an  attempt  to  streamline  the  request  and 
tasking  cycle  and  to  clarify  many  of  the  previous  misunderstandings 
among  the  parties  concerned.  At  issue  were:  (1)  the  need  to 
establish  an  AFTEC  intelligence  directorate;  (2)  the  need  to  expand 
AFIS  OL-AF  manning  and  or  analysis  capabilities  to  provide  all  AFTEC 
intelligence  support;  (3)  the  need  for  Air  Staff  personnel  to  review 
AFTEC  requirements  with  actual  members  of  test  teams;  and  (4)  the  need 
for  written  guidance  and  direction  for  intelligence  support  (i.e.  an 
Air  Force  regulation).  Although  these  problems  were  thoroughly 
discussed,  many  still  remained  unresolved  by  the  end  of  the  year. 191 
OPERATING  LOCATION  OL-N 
Mission  and  Resources 
^A  By  direction  of  the  Assistant  Chief  of  Staff,  Intelligence 
(ACS/T^TAFIS  OL-N  (located  in  San  Antonio,  Texas)  was  responsible  for 
ensuring  that  intelligence  collection  requirements  regarding  the 
Communist  World's  Electronic  Countermeasures  (ECM)  doctrine,  concepts, 
tactics,  and  techniques  were  current,  complete  and  filed  with  the 
appropriate  agency;  acquiring,  analyzing  and  assessing  current  and 
projected  Communist  World  ECM  doctrine  and  tactics  and  their 
capabilities  to  execute  same;  evaluating  the  projected  deployment  and 
employment  of  new  or  modified  Communist  World  ECM  systems  to  determine 
their  threat  to  U.S.  systems  under  development  or  currently  in  the 
field;  producing  finished  intelligence  scenarios,  and  estimates 
concerning  current  and  projected  Communist  World  ECM  doctrine, 
tactics,  deployment,  development,  trends,  roles,  and  ECM  techniques  in 
support  of  operational  commands,  and  USAF  Operational  Test  and 
Evaluation  (OT&E)  in  preparation  for  the  Defense  System  Acquisition 
Review  Council  (DSARC)  or  Air  Force  System  Acquisition  Review  Council 
(AFSARC);  develoDing  the  AF/IN  position  regarding  the  Communist 
World's  ECM  doctrine  and  tactics;  and  providing  management  assistance 
to  producers  and  users  of  the  USAF  Electronic  Combat  Intelligence  Data 
Base,  and  to  agencies  involved  in  development  and  operation  of 
reprogrammable  EW  equipment.  AFIS  OL-N  products,  such  as  threat 
assessments,  scenarios,  analyses,  and  estimates  were  developed  from 
all-source  data  regarding  Communist  ECM  tactics,  doctrines,  concepts 
of  operation,  deployment  and  employment  technical  characteristics, 
Electronic  Counter  Countermeasures  (ECCM)  capabilities,  and  related 
command  and  control  systems. 192 
^B  Essentially,  OL-N  provided  intelligence  personnel 
augmentation  for  dedicated  all -source  intelligence  management  and 
analytical  support  to  the  Air  Force  Electronic  Warfare  Center  (AFEWC) 
Electronic  Warfare  (EW)  mission;  established  and  maintained  a 
capability  to  develop  tailored  EW  threat  assessments  to  fulfill  the 
requirements  of  the  Air  Force;  acted  as  an  AFIS  review  function  for 
selected  Scientific  and  Technical  (S&T)  EW  analytical  efforts  and 
products  to  insure  that  Air  Force  Operational  EW  requirements  were
lie 
considered:  insured  thai  information  from  oDerational  documentation 
reports  which  had  direct  impact  on  both  USAF  and  Department  of  Defense 
(DODi  intellioence  Dositicns  were  provided  to  the  appropriate  agencies 
within  the  intellioence  community;  acted  as  the  AFEWC  intelligence 
interface  with  Service,  DOD  end  National  Intelligence  organizations; 
identified  needs  and  accomplished  preliminary  documentation  to  support 
decompartmentation/sanitization  of  intelligence  data  to  be  released  in 
support  of  AFEWC  EW  activities/responsibilitios;  in  support  of  the 
AFEWC  "EW  Flagqinc"  concept,  initiated  any  fol!ow-up  actions  required 
to  confirm  thYea't/parametric  changes;  established  and  maintained 
procedures  for  resolution  of  critical  intelligence  issues  which 
impacted  on  the  AFEWC  mission;  and  in  conjunction  with  the  AFEWC 
Threat  System  Division,  maintained  a  library  of  EW  related  threat 
information,  and  performed  other  EW  intelligence  support  activities  as 
required  by  AFIS.193 
J[B  The  Ol  remained  divided  into  three  subdivisions  —  the 
Threat  Analysis  Division,  the  Administrative  Division  and  the  Programs 
Division.  Total  manpower  included  20  authorizations  with  19  assigned. 
Colonel  Clinton  K.  Glenny  continued  as  Chief.  *  The  annual  OL 
operatina  budaet  for  FY82  was  $185,000.  Fund  expenditures  included 
$42,000  for  TDY;  SUA, 000  for  civilian  pay;  $4,300  for  equipment  and 
supplies;  and  $1$V70D  for  ecuipment  rental.  The  ending 
FY82  was  +$B,00D, % 
balance   for 
ODerations 
*  The  Chief,  AFIS  OL-N  also  held  the  position  of  Headquarters 
ESC/DCS-IN.  The  Deputy  Chief,  also  held  the  position  of  Headquarters 
ESC/INKE   (Chief,   EW  Threat  Division). 
C*4 
in 
(A 
P 
lT» 
H 
o. 
0>
120 
In  mid-19S2,  OL-N  completed  a  long-term  project  to  compile 
data  ^on  the  use  of  optical,  electro-optical  and  infrared  devices  in 
Soviet  weapon  systems.  The  results  were  published  as  AF1S  OL-N 
Publication  82-2.  This  study  was  initiated  at  the  request  of  the  Air 
Force  Test  and  Evaluation  Center  (AFTEC).  Subsequently,  requests  for 
information  made  by  Headquarters  Electronic  Security  Command  (ESC), 
the  Air  Force  Electronic  Warfare  Center  (AFEWC)  and  operational  units 
indicated  a  more  prevalent  need  for  a  single  source  of  EO/IR  system 
intelligence.  Included  in  the  study  were  optical  fire  control  systems 
for  AAA,  SAMs  and  aircraft,  IR-guided  air-to-air  and  surface-to-air 
missiles,  infrared  search  and  track  systems  on  fighter  aircraft,  IR, 
and  TV  imaging  fire  control  systems  for  AAA,  SAMs  and  aircraft,  TV  and 
IR  aerial  reconnaissance  systems,  ground-based  and  airborne  laser 
range-finders,  laser  target  designators,  laser-guided  munitions,  and 
high  energy  laser  weapons.  This  publication  was  very  well  received 
and,  since  initial  distribution  of  over  500  copies,  the  OL  had 
received  requests  for  the  book   from  about  two  dozen  other  USAF,   U.S. 
Navy  (USN),  U.S.  Army  (USA)  and  Joint/DOD  organizations. 
In  SeDtember,  AFIS  OL-N  was  asked  to  develoo  a  brief  study 
on  the  People's  Republic  of  China  (PRC)  airborne  ECM  capabilities.  On 
completion  of  this  study,  a  definite  need  was  found  for  a  single,  all- 
source  study  of  PRC  ECM  capabilities  along  the  areas  covered  by  the 
North  Korean   publication.      The  OL  began   the  new  PRC   study  by  the  end 
in 
ift 
M 
0) 
o. 
0) 
u 
ft) 
ft o 
Q
121 
of  the  year.  Colonel  Glenny  expected  the  study  to  be  completed  by  the 
fall  of  1983. 21° 
tfA  The  OL  also  supported  the  REC  Command  Control  and 
Communications  (C3)  Links  project  for  ESC/ IN.  The  purpose  of  this 
project  was  to  develop  a  diagram  of  Soviet  REW-related  communications 
nets  for  the  ESC  Red  Team  in  support  of  the  Nellis  Range  Group.  ESC 
was  attempting  to  incorporate  the  REW  links  into  the  total  REC 
environment  which  would  be  used  to  support  the  Red  Flag  and  other 
exercises  and  operations  on  the  •Nellis  Range.  The  product  was 
coordinated  with  the  Foreign  Technology  Oi vision  (FTO)  and  the  Foreign 
Science  and  Technology  Center  (FSTC).2T1 
^R  In  response  to  a  need  stated  by  a  Defense  Intelligence 
Agency  (DI A)  EW  working  group  in  1981,  an  OL-N  initiated  study  was 
done  on  Soviet  Space  EW  and  a  postulation  of  Soviet  Space 
Electromagnetic  Combat  Ooctrine  produced.  This  postulation  was 
disseminated  as  an  analyst  exchange  in  August  at  the  Secret  level. 
Responses  to  the  ANEX  were  received  from  AF/INW,  SAC/IN,  Space 
Division,  the  National  Security  Agency  (NSA),  AFSC/IN  and  ESC/IN.  As 
of  31  December,  responses  were  pending  from  FTD,  DIA,  Space  Command, 
and  AF/INE.  In  general,  responses  received  were  favorable  and  raised 
valid  questions  in  regard  to  specific  points  in  the  postulation.  The 
postulation  was  being  revised  and  was  scheduled  to  be  redisseminated 
at  the  SCI  level. 212 
AFIS  OL-N  was  tasked  by  ESC/IN  in  1982  to  provide  a  study  of 
the  ECfTcapabilities  of  the  Socialist  Republic  of  Vietnam  (SRV).  This 
study  would  cover  air,  ground,  naval,  HF,  and  COMSAT  Jamming 
capabilities  and  had  an  estimated  completion  date  of  July  1983. "J 
CM 
a 
4) 
U 
9) 
r-t 
«
12: 
provided 
intelligence  support  planning  to  the 
exercises  held  during  the  Blue  Flag  at 
Hurlburt"  Field,  Florida.  The  last  exercise  to  which  OL-N  actually 
deployed  people,  as  controllers,  was  Blue  Flag  82-2,  13-20  April.  The 
Green  Flagstaffbecatne  the  Office  of  Primary  Responsibility  (OPR)  for 
futureff  ^exercies   at   Blue  Flag.      AFISO^N^jowever,   still 
acted     as^^technical     advisor     and    provided  d|  m    training 
throughout  the  year  to  AFEWC^nd  Headquarters  Em,  personnel   deploying 
to  1982  Blue  Flag  exercises.217 
oil: 
•A. 
O « 
D 
«ft 
U 
0) 
ex
o 
u 
Q, 
4) 
u « 
0) 
e 
AFIS  OL-N  provided  EW  systems  intelligence  support  in  three 
areas.  "These  included  the  ALR-74. Working  Group,  the  Advanced  Tactical 
Aircraft  Protection  System  (ATAPS),  and  an  ALQ-131  System  Update 
Missionization  Study  (SUMS).  The  ALR-74  radar  warning  program  was 
formerly  known  as  the  ALR-67/69  Update  program.  The  Air  Force  awarded 
a  production  prototype  contract  to  ITEK,  Applied  Technology  Division, 
in  April  1981.  The  primary  program  objective  was  to  acquire  and 
field,  during  1984,  the  capability  to  provide  required  warning  of  the 
engagement  status  of  hostile  radar  air  defense  systems.  AFIS  OL-N 
participated  in  the  ALR-74  Prototype  Threat  List  Review  and  made
124 
recommendations  to  AF/IN*.  The  ALR-74  prototype  threat  list  was 
scheduled  to  be  used  to  evaluate  the  performance  of  the  ALR-74. 
AF/INW  incorporated  AFIS  OL-N  recommendations  in  the  overall  threat 
list  which  was  validated  by  AF/1N.222 
flfe  The  AT APS  Joint  Threat  Assessment  was  a  joint  product 
incorporating  updates  of  threat  system  parametric  data  provided  by  the 
Army,  Navy  and  Air  Force  S&TI  centers.  AFIS  OL-N  participated  in  the 
ATAPS  Joint  Threat  Steering  Group  which  reviewed  and  coordinated  the 
production  of  this^ assessment.  The  threat  assessment  was  validated  by 
AF/INE6  in  August. 223 
flp  The  ALQ-131  SUMS  program  was  an  evaluation  tool  to  rate 
projected  updates  for  the  ALQ-131  ECM  system.  AFIS  OL-N  participated 
in  the  ALQ-131  SUMS  Working  Group.  As  a  result  of  tasking  from  the 
Working  Group,  OL-N  reviewed  the  data  and  data  sources  used  by  the 
Georgia  Institute  of  Technology  for  the  ALQ-131  SUMS  program. 
Recommendations  for  improvement  to  the  program  were  provided  to  the 
Georgia  Institute  of  Technology. 224 
^p  AFIS  OL-N  also  supported  the  Area  Reprogramming  Capability 
(ARC)  program.  The  purpose  of  the  ARC  program  was  to  give  user 
commands  the  capability  to  respond  rapidly  to  threat  environment 
perturbations  by  creating  changes  to  a  wide  range  of  field 
reprogrammable  ECM  and  RWR  systems.  AFIS  OL-N  was  selected  to 
participate  in  the  ARC  Working  Group,  with  representatives  on  the 
Intelligence  Support  Working  Group  and  the  Computer  Resources  Working 
Group.  Most  of  the  program  effort  was  directed  at  reviewing  the 
Georgia  Institute  of  Technology  rewrite  of  the  ARC  System 
Specification.  The  last  review  was  held  in  December  and  the 
specification  was  scheduled  to  be  finalized  and  published  during  early 
1983.  AFIS  OL-N,  along  with  AFIS  OL-F  (located  at  Eglin  AFB, 
Florida),  was  instrumental  in  incorporating  Computer  Aided  Electronic 
Warfare  Information  System  (CAEWIS)  functions  in  the  Threat  Data 
Processing  Software  System.  ALso,  AFIS  OL-N  and  OL-F  worked  together 
to  develop  a  preliminary  intelligence  support  concept  including 
requirements,  data  flow,  fusion  and  processing  for  submission  to  the 
ARC  Working  Group. 225 
ride 
Analyst-to-analyst  exchanges  were  held  throughout  1982  to 
provide  Headquarters  SAC  and  USAFTAWC  reprogramming  analysts  and 
engineers  the  opportunity  to  discuss  problems  and  concerns  with  the 
various  S8JI  center  systems  analysts,  AFIS  OL-N  organized  a  series  of 
eight  meetings  in  1982.   These 'meetings  were  held  at  the  Foreign 
Technology  Division,  Dayton,  Ohio;  the  Foreign  Science  and  Technology 
Center,  Charlottesville,  Virginia;  the  Missile  Intelligence  Agency, 
Huntsville,  Alabama;  the  Naval  Intelligence  Support  Center,  Suitland, 
Maryland:  and  the  Air  Force  Electronic  Warfare  Center,  San  Antonio, 
Texas. 226
125 
OPERATING  LOCATION  F 
Mission  and  Resources 
8^  AFIS  Operating  Location  F  (OL-F),  located  at  Eglin  AFB, 
Florida;  provided  all-source  intelligence  Electronic  Warfare  and 
Command,  Control,  Communications,  and  Countermeasures  (EW/C3CM) 
support  to  the  Tactical  Air  Warfare  Center  (TAWC)  Commander.  The  OL 
served  as  an  analytical  adjunct  to  the  Director  of  Intelligence,  TAWC, 
pending  the  realization  of  an  internal  Tactical  Air  Command  (TAC)  TAWC 
capability.  The  OL  assisted  the  TAWC  staff  in  the  analysis  and  use  of 
all-source  threat  data  which  impacted  the  TAWC  mission. 
Organizationally,  OL-F  worked  directly  for  the  Air  Force  Electronic 
Combat  Intelligence  Group  (AF/INW)  located  at  the  Pentagon.227 
The  OL  also  provided  scientific  and  technical  intelligence 
of  foreign  weapon  svstems;  command,  control,  communications  and 
intelligence  (C3I);  C3^  countermeasures  (C3CM)  and  their  employment  by 
foreign  armed  services;  coordinated  with  USAF  TAWC/IN  to  provide  the 
Center  with  special  access  program  administration;  documented 
Electronic     Warfare     (EW)     integrated     reprogramming     system     support  *:\. 
procedures;  managed  the  initiation,  processing,  and  satisfaction  of 
operational  and  technical  Electronic  Intelligence  (ELINT) 
requirements;  managed  all  EW-related  analyst-to-analyst  exchanges 
between  USAF  TAWC  EW  systems  analysts  and  national  scientific  and 
technical  intelligence  center  analysts;  identified  and  documented 
requirements  for  decompartmentation  of  intelligence  data;  received, 
processed,  and  analyzed  all-source  intelligence,  including  ELINT  data, 
to  confirm  EW  threat  and  parametric  changes;  recommended  intelligence 
Automated  Data  Processing  (ADP)  and  communications  support 
requirements;  maintained  intelligence  quick  reaction  capability  for 
support  of  EW  contingencies  and  exercises;  and  provided  direct 
technical  intelligence  support  to  Operational  Test  and  Evaluation  and 
Follow-on  Operational  Test  and  Evaluation  (OT&E/FOT&E)  involving 
foreign  material  exploitation. 228 
WM  As  of  31  December,  OL-F  had  three  officer,  three  civilian, 
and  tnree  enlisted  personnel  authorized  and  assigned.  The  civilian 
total  included  one  temporary  position.  In  addition,  two  USAF  TAWC 
people  were  assigned  to  the  OL  (one  civilian  and  one  enlisted).  The 
OL-F    FY    82    budget    was    $129,000    to    support    civilian    pay,    travel,  ^ 
supplies   and  equipment.      By   the  end   of   the   fiscal   year,    the  OL   had  - 
$7,263.58    remaining.        The    organization    received    office    space    and  <^- 
admini strati ve     and     security     support     from    USAF     TAWC.         All     other  <£ 
supplies  and  furnishings  support  was  provided  by  the  Eglin  AFB 
Armament  Division  (host  organization).22^  V 
^^      The    AFIS    Inspector    Genera^flG)     performed    a    Management         ^ 
Effectiveness    InspectioiWME^^fth€«fcfrom27-29   July.      Overall,        ^ 
four  unitswere  rated  {|  A-      As   a 
the  MEI.fl    ^was  able  tojus^uyadanTona^^erTcal  support,   upgrade     £ 
the  military  manning  and  revise  the  AFIS  Reservist  Listina.23^  £
Operational  and  Functional  Activities 
o 
w • 
p 
D. 
<D 
w 
0) 
»H 
4> 
p
VT 
CM    ■'" 
•n   -. 
v> 
(A 
ft 
P 
m 
IS 
p. 
« 
«
T?P 
^^^  Among  several  Electronic  Combat  initiatives  within  TAC,  USAF 
TAWC^was  tasked  to  develop  a  unique  three  week  program  of  instruction 
to  prepare  selected  squadron  and  wing  (tactical)  pilots  to  act  as 
Electronic  Combat  (Instructor)  pilots  (ECP).  OL-F  provided  several 
levels  of  support  and  learned  several  lessons  during  this  process. 2^ 
MM  The  Commander  of  TAC  tasked  the  TAWC  to  develop  a  "pilot" 
oriented  Electronic  Combat  (EC)  instructor  curriculum  on  19  February. 
The  original  plan  envisioned  a  two-week  (ten  day)  course  including  six 
to  six  and  one-half  hours  of  "threat"  support.  Subsequent 
reevaluation  of  both  TAC  and  TAWC/EW  called  for  a  13-16  classroom 
hour  "Threat  Block"  encompassing  Electronic  Warfare  (EW),  Ground 
Control  Intercept  (GCI),  Airborne  Intercept  (AI)t  Surface-to-Air 
Missile  (SAM),  Anti-Aircraft  Artillery  (AAA),  Naval  and  Radio 
Electronic  Combat  (REC).242 
    A  meeting  held  on  29  March  with  TAWC/IN/EW  and  OL-F 
identified  13  hours  of  threat  environment  requirement  for  the  class. 
TAWC/IN  would  handle  the  AI/AAA  blocks  while  OL-F  prepared  and 
presented  AM  and  non-Soviet  air  defense  segments.  Classes  were  to  be 
completed  with  script  and  graphics,  etc.,  on  or  about  19  April.  The 
final  Air  Ground  Operations  School  (AGOS)  Facility  Board  was  scheduled 
for  -early  June  with  the  first  Electronic  Combat  Instructor  School 
(ECIS)  course  scheduled  to  begin  in  mid  July. 243 
tedT 
_ p  The  Electronic  Combat  Threat  Environment  Description 
(ECTEDK  as  Threat  Reference  Volume  II,  was  recommended  for  usage  with 
the  hostile  forces  portion  of  the  ECTED  used  as  a  student 
handout/class  reference.  A  message  request  on  6  April  to  the  Foreign 
Technology  Division  (FTD/TQI)  for  30  copies  of  the  updated,  Air  Force 
approved  Volume  II  was  coordinated  with  TAWC/IN/EWA.  The  suspense  for 
the  document  was  1  June. 244 
    The  Commander  of  TAC  directed  the  training  block  to  be  a  15 
class  day  (vice  ten)  course  scheduled  as  Professional  Military 
Education  (PME)  six  times  a  year.  An  additional  one  week  "Managers" 
level  course,  a  German  short  course  (NATO)  and  an  annual  pilot 
refresher  seminar  was  also  tasked.   The  course  title  was  changed  to 
C4 
in 
CO 
S3 
lA 
U 
V 
o- 
u 
f-l 
0)
129 
Tactical  Fighter  Electronic  Combat  Instructor  Course  (TFECIC)  on  14 
May. 245 
flfe  As  requested  by  TAWC/IN,  OL-F  prepared  a  total  of  nine 
classrwn  hours  of  instruction  (EW/GCI,  SAM  and  non-Soviet)  and 
performed  as  alternate  instructor  for  the  TAWC/IN  briefer  on  AI,  AAA, 
and  intelligence  sources  blocks  of  instruction.  On  3  June,  Mr.  Arthur 
R.  Gibson  (OL-F,  Air  Intelligence  Officer)  presented  the  early 
warning/GCI  block  of  instruction  for  TAWC  Air  Ground  Operations  School 
(AGOS)  formal  review.  Faculty  review  for  Soviet  SAM  and  non-Soviet 
air  defense  blocks  was  tentatively  scheduled  for  10-11  and  17-18  June 
respectively.  Mr.  Gibson  presented  these  briefings  during  the  first 
week  (19-23  July)  of  the  TFECIC  at  AGOS,  Hurlburt  Field,  Florida.  The 
TFECIC  was  now  a  formal  PME  course  including  pass  or  fail  criteria. 
The  first  class  began  on  19  July.  Twenty-three  students  enrolled 
(roughly  15  F-15  aircraft  pilots  and  mixed  F-lll  aircraft  EWO  pilots). 
The  threat  block  began  on  21  July.  The  two  day  block  was  well 
received. 246 
fl  ||  OL-F  initiated  action  with  FTD/TQIV  to  place  each  student  on 
distribution  for  the  ECTED.  This  significantly  improved  the  squadron 
level  EC  data  base  and  accelerated  field  dissemination.  Volume  II  of 
the  ECTED  was  used  as  reference  text  and  was  given  to  each  student  to 
use  at  his  unit.  Technical  intelligence  support  was  also  provided 
during  the  tactical  problem  (exercise)  to  assist  the  students  in 
developing  EC  plans. 247 
^^  The  only  significant  problem  encountered  pertained  to  a  lack 
of  knowledge  on  the  part  of  the  TAF  organizations  sending  students  to 
the  course.  In  some  cases,  students  were  selected  who  were  enroute 
(PCS)  from  squadron  assignments  and  would  not  serve  as  EC  instructors. 
This  situation  improved  before  the  next  class. 243 
fP  A  TAWC/IN  and  OL-F  message  to  FTD/TQII  requesting 
distribution  of  ECTED  to  graduates  of  the  TFECIC  course  was  rescinded 
by  AF/INW  message.  This  action,  for  whatever  reason,  created  problems 
for  the  TAWC  and  TFECIC  staff.  No  other  series  of  documents,  written 
to  the  level  of  aircrews,  could  be  identified  that  emphasized  EC 
related  threat  data  in  a  concise  manner.  Accordingly,  TAWC/EW  and  0L- 
F  agreed  to  use  the  ECTED  as  a  basic  reference  document  for  the  TFECIC 
program.  Until  changes  were  instituted  to  improve  the  availability  of 
threat  documentation  at  the  squadron  level,  the  new  EC  instructor  used 
what  he  could  "scrounge".  This  individual  was  designated  by  TAC  RED 
as  the  Operations/Intelligence  interface  at  the  squadron.  Without 
source  material,  his  efforts  to  credibly  train  his  unit  were  futile. 
He  had  to  have  information.  TAC/INS  notified  TAWC  that  they  concurred 
with  the  TAWC  request. 249 
MM  Major  Richard  P.  Viau  (AF/INW)  informed  Mr.  Gibson  that  the 
INW  message  was  based  upon  TAC/IN's  informal  desires.  This  could  not 
be  supported.  A  request  was  made  to  INW  to  provide  assistance  in 
getting  the  information  to  the  aircrews  by  requesting  FTD  to  follow 
the  original  TAWC  message  to  send  out  the  documentation  as  soon  as
130 
possible.  TAC/INA  in  discussions  with  TAWC/IN  requested  a  staff  paper 
on  an  EC  training  course,  similar  to  the  TFECIC  course,  geared  for 
unit  intelligence  officers  and  NCOs.  In  addition,  TAC/INA  asked  that 
the  course  syllabus  include  Radar  Warning  Receiver  (RWR)  and 
Electronic  Countermeasure  (ECM)  data,  and  be  no  more  than  two  weeks 
(10  days)  in  length.  TAC,  in  turn,  staffed  the  paper  to  determine  the 
feasibility.  TAWC/INU  prepared  the  paper  with  OL-F  inputs.  Following 
TAWC  approval,  the  paper  was  forwarded  to  TAC  for  action.  The  course 
was  approved,  developed  and  conducted  by  USAF  TAWC.250 
flfc  Class  number  two  of  the  TFECIC  was  scheduled  for  18  October 
to  5  November.  It  consisted  of  F-4  and  F-16  aircraft  pilots.  Mr. 
Gibson  was  scheduled  to  instruct  Soviet  SAM,  EW/GCI,  free  world  air 
defense  system,  and  participate  as  technical  advisor  during  the  end  of 
the  course  practical  exercise.  The  status  of  ECTED,  Volume  II, 
Hostile  Forces,  used  as  a  student  handbook,  was  still  unresolved. 
TAC/INA  agreed  to  send  20  copies  of  the  (pending)  140  sets  on  order  as 
soon  as  they  were  received.  No  one  could  confirm  shipment  in  time  for 
the  class.251 
|fc  The  second  running  of  the  TFECIC  course  began  on  18  October. 
Twenty-three  students  attended  the  course  with  22  unsuccessful 
graduates.    The  class  designated  for  F-4  and  F-16  pilots  was 
complicated  by  unscheduled  A-10,  Airborne  Warning  and  Control  System 
(AWACS)  and  other  various  staff  and  reserve  personnel.  Clarification 
concerning  attendee  selection  thru  TAC/DOO  corrected  the  problem  for 
the  third  class  scheduled  for  January  and  February  1983.   The  next 
class  for  A-10  and  A-7  aircrews  was  scheduled  for  late  January 
1983.252 
    AFIS  OL-F  continued  to  have  difficulty  finding  technical 
data  on  current  free  world  SAM/AI/AAA,  etc.  An  AFEWS  meeting  on  7-9 
December  on  Blue/Gray  data  base  improved  the  OLs  efforts.  TAC/IN 
tasked  TAWC  to  produce  an  Electronic  Combat  Intelligence  Orientation 
Course  tailored  to  the  needs  of  squadron  intelligence  personnel.  The 
first  class  was  scheduled  for  25-29  April  1983  at  TAWC  followed  by  the 
week  long  EC  training  seminar  from  2-6  May.25** 
»The  Computer  Aided  Electronic  Warfare  Information  System 
,  an  AN/GYQ-21(V)(PDP  11/70)  based  computer  system  to  host  and 
manipulate  the  Electronic  Warfare  Integrated  Reprogramming  Data  Base 
(EWIRDB)  became  operational  in  November  1981.  During  1982,  OL-F  was 
the  CAEWIS  EWIR  Data  Base  Manager  (DBM)  and  Primary  Interface  with 
TAWC  EW  System  Engineers.25* 
^^_  OL-F  identified  numerous  software  irregularities  and 
coordinated  with  the  maintenance  contractor  to  correct  the  problems. 
By  years  end,  the  CAEWIS  was  a  fully  operational  system  with  minimum 
problems.  The  largest  complaint  from  users  of  CAEWIS  was  "user 
friendliness".  It  appreared  that  the  system  was  difficult  to  learn 
and  use.  As  a  result,  OL-F  identified  a  number  of  enhancements  which 
would  simplify  use  of  the  systems.  Through  coordination  with 
Headquarters  TAC,  AFIS/IND  and  the  Rome  Air  Development  Center  (RADC),
w 
a  contract  was  awarded  in 
enhancements  to  CAEWIS.255 
October  to  implement  the  AFIS  recommended 
SSMn 
   A  separate  contractual  effort,  called  TAWC  EW  Support  System 
(TESST^n^ti ated  in  1981,  was  completed  in  September  1982.  This  study 
effort  evaluated  the  CAEWIS  system  against  TAWC  EW  reprogramming 
intelligence  requirements  and  provided  recommendations  for  future 
automated  development  of  CAEWIS.  The  product  of  this  contract  was  a 
functional  description  and  detailed  specification  for  a  CAEWIS  follow- 
on  system  to  meet  present  and  future  needs.  OL-F  was  the  contract 
monitor  and  user-contractor  interface  driving  the  TESS  effort.256 
•n 
o 
& 
M 
0) 
(X 
4J 
« 
f-t 
0) 
o
CI 
o 
« 
« 
        From    29    March    through   1   April,    OL-F    members    attended    a 
meeting  at  AFIS/IND,  Boiling  AFB,  D.C.,  which  examined  the  TAF 
procedures  and  Automated  Data  Processing  (ADP)  capabilities  for 
conducting  C3CM;  documented  C3CM  data  base  applications,  interfaces 
and  intelligence  information  flows;  and  recommended  an  overall  ADP 
architecture  for  intelligence  support  to  C3CM.264 
in 
O 
if 
^ 
C 
P 
th
* o 
s 
M 
a 
.H 
O 
j^^me 
From  1-3  November,  OUF  hosted  a  meeting  to  address  ADP 
requirements  for  C3  intelligence  graphics  support.  This  meeting  was  a 
follow-on  to  an  earlier  meeting  hosted  by  AFIS/INO  in  which  a  draft 
SOW  for  a  concept  of  C3  graphics  support  was  developed.  The  meeting 
was  attended  by  representatives  from  Headquarters  ESC  (AD/IN),  RADC 
(IRAE)  and  TAWC  (EW/IN).  The  purpose  of  the  meeting  was  to  outline 
TAC/TAWC  and  ESC  graphics  requirements  and  to  promote  detailed 
understanding  of  specific  ESC/TAWC  C3  requirements  and  recommended  a 
strategy  before  the  SOW  was  finalized. 269
fl  During  1982,  AFIS  OL-F  personnel  provided  support  to  6reen 
F)  exercises  82  and  83.  OL-F  assisted  TAWC/IN  and  TAWC  GF 
planners  in  the  target  nomination  and  selection  process  for  6F82. 
These  efforts  were  conducted  in  close  coordination  with  Red  Flag 
intelligence,  operations  planners,  Electronic  Warfare  elements  and 
other  staff  agencies.  During  22  February  -  5  March  (GF82),  an  OL-F 
representative  acted  as  coordinator  and  focal  point  for  intelligence 
inputs  and  requests  for  information  regarding  electronic  warfare.  In 
addition,  the  representative  conducted  aircrew  intelligence  training 
on  Soviet  communications  jamming  versus  TAC  Air  and  Red  C3CM.  These 
briefings  were  generated  by  OL-F  at  the  request  of  TAWC/GF  and  the 
4440th  TFTG/IN  (Red  Flag).  OL-F  provided  support  to  planning  and 
scenario  development  initiatives  for  GF83  throughout  the  remainder  of 
the  year.  In  addition,  OL-F  provided  comments  to  TAWC/IN  on  the  Green 
Flag  engineering  support  and  analysis  master  plan  prepared  by  Georgia 
Institute  of  Technology  under  Contract  Number  F-08635-82-C-0373.  The 
OL  review  of  this  document  revealed  many  weaknesses  which  needed  to  be 
.'resolved.  By  the  end  of  the  year,  all  of  these  issues  had  not  been 
satisfactorily  answered. 271 
iriaT 
Besides  ^  D  exercise  support,  OL-F  provided  Foreign 
Material  Exploitation  support  to  several  other  projects.  These 
included  Have  Lighter/Coronet  Zippo,  Have  Coat,  Have  Shell,  and 
Granite  Base.273 
A  Coronet  Zippo  Ground  Phase  Test  meeting  was  held  on  4-5 
JanuaryT  An  instrumentation  proposal,  provided  by  OL-F,  was  discussed 
and  formalized.  The  final  test  planning  meeting  was  held  at  Edwards 
AFB,  California,  from  2-4  February.  The  tentative  test  date  slipped 
to  7-8  June,  due  to  conflicting  requirements  at  the  test  facility. 
The  flight  test  phase  was  scheduled  for  October. 274 
CM 
m 
O 
t w • 
p 
m 
p<  .J 
v u 
o 
1-1 
0) 
p
flfc  Additional  Scientific  and  Technical  (S&T)  data  was  requested 
f  rom  ^m  D/AL  through  the  U.S.  Army  Missile  Intelligence  Agency 
(USAMIA).  The  package  was  received  on  14  January.  The  Ground  Mount 
Phase  Test  Plan  was  coordinated  on  2  June.  The  Ground  Phase  began  at 
Edwards  AFB  on  14  June.  The  flight  test  phase  was  scheduled  for  the 
October-November  time  frame.  The  flight  test  PIO  was  coordinated  from 
TAWC  to  TAC/AFSC.  The  instrumentation  requirements,  data  recording 
and  site  facilities  were  reviewed. 275 
ugh  1 
Coronet  Zipj 
throug7T12  November. 
testing  began  on  12  October  and  continued 
technical  Intelligence  Advisor.  His  TOY  wi 
due  to  TFECIC/ALQ-131  testing  conflicts. 
ibson  participated  as 
25-29  October 
^^  In  support  of  project  Have  Coat,  OL  personnel  provided 
review  and  analysis  of  data  generated  from  ground  and  flight  testing 
support.  Questions  concerning  fire  control/MSL  launch  sequence  raised 
by  test  pilots  were  discussed  in  detail. 277 
An  ESD  sponsored  (Have  Shell)  program  Initial  Operational 
Test  Ind  Evaluation  (IOT&E)  responsibility  was  tasked  to  TAWC/THC 
project  officer.     OL-F  directly  supported  ECTS  on  2  November. 
M 
•n 
• 
o 
to 
D 
•ft 
U 
4J 
« 
«n 
to 
«n 
u 
0) 
« 
«> 
r-i 
4) 
P
TW 
CM 
•A 
• 
O 
CO 
«n 
4) 
« 
produced  and 
TABLE  3-10 
COMPASS  CALL  ACTIVITIES  -  1982 
Part  I  Compass  Call  Jamming  Strategy  (Blue  Over  Red) 
May  82  -  Central  European  Scenario  Report 
distributed. 
Part  II  Compass  Call  Jamming  Strategy  (Red  Over  Blue) 
Mar-Apr  82  -  Lot  Disposition  of  Forces  and  Links  on  Overlays 
-Apr  82  -  Criticality  Analysis 
May  82  -  Vulnerability  Analysis 
May  82  -  Target  Prioritization 
May  82  -  Report  Preparation 
Phase  I  Compass  Call  Qualitative  Operational  Test  and  Eval  (QOT&E) 
Aug-Nov  82  -  Nellis  and  Tonapah 
Southwest  Asia  Jamming  Strategy  Preparation 
July  82  -  Ongoing
137 
Blue  Over  Red  Update  to  Support  Phase  II  QOT&E 
Oct  82  -  Ongoing 
C3  GATES  (Chromatics  7900)  -  Statement  of  Work 
Nov  82  -  Project  Ongoing 
Mfk  In  accordance  with  guidance  received  from  Headquarters  TAC, 
the  TawC  continued  their  jamming  strategy  studies.  Prior  to  deciding 
which  area  was  to  be  studied,  it  was  essential  that  OL-F  ascertain  the 
availability  of  Special  Intelligence  (SI)  information  necessary  to 
support  these  studies. 
o 
« 
M 
lA 
«-  ■-: 
in 
• 
o 
•n 
p. 
W 
V 
H 
ft
r 
_  APIS  OL-F  provided  three  contributions  in  support  of  the 
development  of  the  Mission  Support  Facility  (MSF)  for  Compass  Call, 
The  OL  provided  the  Compass  Call  project  Manager  with  a  general 
description  of  how  the  MSF  should  work;  the  data  base  requirements; 
how  the  data  base  should  be  structured;  who  should  provide  the 
intelligence  updates  and  by  what  means  and  format;  how  to  conduct 
mission  planning;  and  specific  pitfalls  that  should  be  avoided  to  have 
a  cohesive  and  dynamic  system.  290 
_  Detachment  4,  2762nd  LSS  (AFLC),  Lockheed  Aircraft  Company, 
and  Intercon,  the  contractor  for  the  Mission  Support  Facility  (MSF) 
wanted  to  clarify  certain  aspects  relative  to  mission  planning,  Blue 
Flag  exercises  and  data  base  inputs.  These  points  were  clarified  and 
additional  information  relative  to  systems  threats,  NATO  data  formats 
and  mission  planning  were  provided  to  Detachment  4,  2762nd  LSS. 291 
AFIS  OL-F  representatives  also  met  with  representatives  of 
Detachment  4,  2762nd  LSS,  ESC/INN  and  Intercon  to  discuss  development 
of  the  MSF.  The  purpose  of  the  meeting  was  to  assure  that  the  Air 
Force  would  be  able  to  effectively  use  the  software  designed  for  the 
MSF  through  a  review  and  validation  of  the  data  base  extraction  and 
manipulation  processes  in  conjunction  with  the  prioritized  jamming 
M 
•ft 
u 
«rt 
0. 
•8  -.
139 
target  study. 
___  In  addition,  OL-F  conducted  a  walk-through  of  the 
contractor  software  to  ensure  that  his  understanding  of  the  data  base 
element  relationships  was  correct.  OL-F  discussed  the  significance  of 
default  parameters  for  the  calculation  of  J/S  ratios  and  Its 
relationship  to  the  Jamming  Strategy  in  support  of  the  software 
acceptance  testing  for  the  mission  planning  process. 292 
    AFIS  OL-F  supported  several  actions  in  conjunction  with 
Compass  Call  QOT&E  Phase  I.  The  OL  provided  extensive  support  to  the 
Compass  Call  Project  Manager  prior  to  the  actual  test  conducted 
between  August  and  November  at  Nell Is  AFB, 
ie  purpose  ot  tne  meeting  was  to  review 
lata  requirements  and  to  ascertain  availability  of  information.  NSA 
agreed  to  provide  the  necessary  data  and  the  parametric  values  using 
the  existing  format  contained  in  2/00/APP-1-80  and  1-81. 293 
in 
o 
M » 
D 
a 
« 
« 
CO 
» 
U 0 a 
0 o
140 
AFIS  OL-F   attended   the   ALR-74   working   group   meeting   on   9 
The     establishment     of     a     threat     working     group     (TWG) 
There  was   some  confusion  concerning 
requirement.        A    tenative    plan    used 
Reprogramming      (EWIR)      and     Threat 
a   baseline.      The  TWG_would   convene 
February. 
charter /membershi p  was  prepared. 
AF/RD  "threat  assessment"  PMD 
Electronic  Warfare   Integrated 
Environment  Description  (TED)  as 
and  address  special  needs  (additional  data)  as  required. 'adS0 
   I ne  oriqinai      letter  proposing  EWIR/TED  as  a 
>aseline  with   provisions   for   adding   data    through   AF/IN   channels   was 
required.      An   AF/INW   message   deleted   provisions   for    adding   data   to 
EWIR/TED  and  required  an  all-inclusive  representation  of  emitter  (i.e. 
list). 301 
         AFIS    OL-F,     Ol-N     and     OL-AF     were     omitted     from    AF/INW 
addresses.  The  entire  matter  created  serious  controversy  among 
TAWC/EWER,  AF/IN,  OL-F  and  OL-AF.  Any  action  or  recommendation  to 
change  the  threat  support  proposed  by  TAWC/EWER  produced  direct 
conflict.  OL-F  maintained  the  need  for  formal  threat  (assessment) 
support  to  the  ALR-74.  AFIS  OL-N  and  OL-AF  had  expressed  concerns 
that  the  current  AF/INW  supported  plan  was  insufficient.  A  TAC/INO 
message  raised  additional  questions  regarding  exclusive  use  of 
EWIR/ECTED  for  ALR-74. 302 
C4 
A 
en 
S3 
•A 
t 
« 
S3 
m 
M a a 
IS
141 
^P  p-F  message  to  AF/IM  was  sent  detailing  the  OLs  concerns 
(i.e.,  AF/lNtr,'  request  to  forward  a  copy  of  the  "Final  Version-ALR-74 
Prototype  Threat  List"  from  TAWC  to  AFIS  OL-N  for  review).  OL-F  was 
unaware  of  any  such  list.  After  some  confusion,  a  copy  of  the  one 
?mS,?  "Fin«l  Version  List"  was  secured.  A  copy  was  sent  via  DACOM  from 
TAWC  on  Z6  August  but  it  was  not  received  by  AF/INW.  AFIS  OL-F 
notified  OL-N  and  OL-AF  of  the  existing  list.  After  retyping,  the 
list  was  forwarded  to  both  AFIS  OLs  for  their  review  and  comments. 
However,  the  list  still  contained  questionable  data. 303 
^_  TAWC/EWA  requested  technical  threat  assistance  to  evaluate 
the  results  of  a  Tyndall  AFB,  Florida,  radio  test  facility  APR-63 
radar  Electronic  Counter-Countermeasures  (ECCM)  testing  and  "roof  top" 
simulator  testing  by  Hughes  Aircraft  Corporation  Radar  Division. 
Credible  "threat"  baseline  had  not  been  documented  resulting  in 
various  "generic  threat"  interpretations  of  000  and  Air  Force 
intelligence  positions.  The  results  of  both  testing  efforts  were 
presented  at  a  meeting  hosted  at  HAC,  El  Segundo,  California,  on  7-10 
December. JIM 
    Th*  ALQ-131  receiver/processor  (R/p)  and  band  4/5  mod 
programs  entered  0T&E  in  the  fall  of  1982.  The  ALQ-131  R/P  I0T&E 
would  be  conducted  at  Eg! in  AFB  and  at  the  Fort  Worth,  Texas, 
Simulator  Faci'"       "   ~   —      
plan.   Mr.  Arthur  R.  Gibson 
as  technical  advisor  during 
become  an  annex  within  the  test 
(OL-F  Air  Intelligence  Officer)  continued 
the  actual  testing  at  Eglin  AFB  and  Fort 
m 
• o 
» 
u 
01 a 
%
142 
1525; JeHlii.Tha  *ALQ"l3?  f/P  waS  *? sted  us1ng  various  simulators  and 
computer  models.  A  multiple  scenario  computer  simiilaHnn  was  run  Dy 
Georgia  Tech  ESS.  M^ w^ i— ■   J 
scheduled  for  January  1983. 
A  closer  look  at  the  modeling  was 
AIR  FORCE  SPECIAL  ACTIVITIES  CENTER 
Mission  and  Resources 
* 
D 
*\ 
U 
« 
a.
143 
Special  Activities  Area  (ESAA),  Lindsey  AS,  Germany;  and  Headquarters 
Pacific  Special  Activities  Area  (PSAA),  Hickam  AFB,  Hawaii.  Colonel 
Nicholas  Yankowski  continued  as  the  AFSAC  Commander. 311 
fl ^  There  were  no  major  changes  to  the  organizational  alignment 
of  AFSAC  activities  during  the  year  with  the  exception  of  an  internal 
Headquarters  AFSAC  staff  agency  activation  —  the  Career  Management  and 
Training  Branch  (AFSAC/INXC)  --  and  creation  of  an  operating  location 
(AFSAC  OL-P).312 
   AFSAC s  total  authorized  manpower  in  January  was  265.  This 
number  increased  to  284  by  the  end  of  the  year.  Six  positions  were 
gained  through  the  6DIP  for  the  SEEK  program;  ten  positions  that  had 
been  held  in  reserve  at  the  time  of  amalgamation  were  returned  from 
Air  Force  Intelligence  (AF/IN);  and  three  FY  84  6DIP  approved 
positions  were  received  early  (December  1982)  to  enhance  the  AFSAC 
scientific  and  technology  collection  capability. 313 
In  January,  AFSAC  had  45  unfilled  positions  which  reduced 
manning  to  63  percent  of  total  authorized  strength.  December 
statistics  reflected  47  unfilled  positions  which  lowered  the  manning 
even  further  to  82  percent  of  authorized  strength.  This  shortfall  was 
the  single  limiting  factor  to  optimum  management  of  the  AFSAC  during 
1982.314 
Plans,  Resources  and  Support 
JHB|  The  Plans,  Resources  and  Support  Division  (AFSAC/INX)  had 
five  major  subdivisions:  the  Plans  and  Policy  Branch  (INXA);  the 
Fiscal  Programs  Branch  (INXB);  the  new  Career  Management  and  Training 
Branch  (INXC);  Administration  (AFSAC/DA);  and  Logistics  Management 
(AFSAC/LGS).316 
9P  The  Plans  and  Policy  Branch  (INXA)  provided  recommendations 
to  the  Air  Staff  on  Human  Resources  Intelligence  (HUMINT)  doctrine  and 
policy,  and  reviewed  Air  Force,  Major  Command  (MAJCOM),  and  theater 
plans  and  regulations  for  accuracy  and  completeness  where  HUMINT  was 
concerned;  developed  plans,  concepts  and  objectives  for  the  worldwide 
employment  of  Air  Force  HUMINT  resources;  managed  AFSAC  participation 
in  exercises;  prepared  ai-d  maintained  AFSAC  host-tenant  support 
c/J 
P 
M 
<U 
ft. 
<u 
u 
i-l 
0) 
p
144 
agreements,  interservice  agreements,  and  memoranda  of  understanding; 
managed  Reserve  support  to  AFSAC  and  monitored  training  of  HUMINT 
individual  mobilization  augmentees  (IMAs);  provided  HUMINT  wartime  and 
contingency  planning  support  to  Headquarters  USAF,  MAJCOMs,  and  Air 
Force  theater  commands;  and  directed  the  AFSAC  HUMINT  augmentation 
    As  the  AFSAC  office  of  primary  responsibility  (OPR)  for 
regulations  review  and  development,  INXA  was  responsible  for  the 
processing  of  many  Air  Force,  AFIS,  AFSAC,  and  theater  command 
regulations.  Among  the  most  significant  were  AFISR  23-2,  Organization 
and  Functions  of  AFSAC;  AFSAC  23-Series  Organization  and  Mission 
Regulations  for  AFSAC  Elements;  AFR  28-4,  USAF  Mobility  Planning; 
AFSACR  28-1,  AFSAC  HUMINT  Augmentation  Teams;  200-Series  MAC 
Regulations;  and  AFR  200-XX,  Human  Resources  Intelligence  Collection 
Activities  (See  Appendix  XII  for  detailed  information)."^ 
•J 
U 
V 
u. 
0) 
r-l 
0) 
a
145 
was  also  the  OPR  for  monitoring  AFSAC  exercises 
This  included  HUMINT  planning,  Reserve  support, 
     iNXi 
participation. 
scenario  writing,  and  interrogation  training.  During  1982,  INXA 
managed  AFSAC  participation  in  four  exercises  --  Team  Spirit  82, 
Flintlock  82,  Ulchi  Focus  Lens  82,  and  Proud  Saber  82.321 
ld^R< 
Team  Spirit  82  was  a  joint  Republic  of  Korea  (ROK)  and  U.S. 
field  training  exercise  that  took  place  in  Osan,  Taegu,  and  Taejon, 
ROK  between  17  March  and  8  April.  AFSAC  objectives  were  to  test  the 
mobile  interrogation  team  (MIT)  concept  and  exercise  its 
communications  (MITCOM)  and  to  exercise  AFSAC  augmentation  of 
Detachment  32  during  a  Korean  contingency.  The  exercise  was  a  success 
in  that  it  pointed  out  several  communications,  equipment,  and 
coordination  problems  which  required  additional  work  to  resolve. 322 
ubnc 
The  Flintlock  82  exercise  took  place  in  Vaihingen,  Federal 
Republic  of  Germany,  between  26  April  and  23  May.  AFSAC  objectives 
were  to  practive  setting  up  an  interrogation  facility,  provide 
interrogation  training  for  AFSAC  personnel,  a.id  provide  a  realistic 
wartime  experience  for  prisoners  being  interrogated.  The  exercise  was 
a  valuable  learning  experience  for  all  AFSAC  participants. 323 
_  The  Ulchi  Focus  Lens  82  command  post  exercise  was  held  at 
Taegu  AB,  ROK,  between  17-28  August.  Although  HUMINT  participation 
was  limited,  mainly  due  to  a  lack  of  inputs  at  the  April  planning 
conference,  the  exercise  went  well  and  laid  the  groundwork  for 
expanded  AFSAC  participation  in  future  Ulchi  Focus  Lens  exercises. 324 
O 
t 
S3 
n 
<u a 
o 
v 
4) 
f« 
0) 
p
146 
_^^  At  the  request  of  the  76th  Airlift  Division  (MAC),  Andrews 
AFB,  Maryland,  INXA  passed  to  AFIS/IG  data  supporting  the 
transportation  of  HATs.  The  data  included  sources  of  tasking  (OPLANs 
and  CONPLANS);  unit  type  code  identifications;  numbers  of  personnel; 
types  of  equipment,  and  the  amount  of  size  and  weight;  and  the  origin, 
destination,  and  arrival  times  for  deploying  personnel. 327 
%%  In  order  to  ensure  mobility  processing  support  for  AFSAC 
HATs,  Major  Randall  met  with  representatives  of  the  76th  Airlift 
Oivision/LGX.  They  agreed  that  AFSAC  should  spell  out  its  mobility 
processing  requirements  via  the  AFIS-Andrews  AFB  Host-Tenant  Support 
Agreement,  and  that  INXA  should  be  placed  on  distribution  for  the 
Andrews  AFB  mobility  pi  an.  328 
4/Q  INXA  continued  to  coordinate  with  AFSAC/LGS  on  the 
construction  of  mobility  bags  for  deploying  personnel  and,  on  30 
September,  provided  an  updated  list  of  personnel  identified  against 
specific  OPLAN  unit  type  codes.  This  was  to  ensure  the  contents  of 
mobility  bags  would  be  compatible  with  geographical  and  climactic 
requirements. 329 
£P  Finally,  by  the  end  of  the  year,  INXA  was  nearing  completion 
of  work  on  AFSAC 's  Emergency  Action  Notification  Plan,  while  Captain 
Leon  Holleb  (Plans  Officer)  was  working  with  AFSAC/INOC  to  develop 
administrative  support  kits  for  HUMINT  augmentation  teams.330 
O  Technical  Sergeant  Robert  P.  Newell,  Noncommissioned  Officer 
in  Charge  (NCOIC)  of  INXA  served  as  the  manager  of  AFSAC 's  Reserve 
program,  assigning  individual  mobilization  augmentees  to  various 
offices  within  AFSAC  for  training  and  evaluation.  In  August,  per 
tasking  by  AFIS/MO,  INXA  reviewed  AFSAC's  wartime  augmentation 
requirements  to  change  702XX  Reserve  requirements  (which  were  to  be 
deleted  under  new  DOD  and  USAF/MPM  guidance)  into  20370  and  201XX 
slots.  The  overall  number  of  Reserve  positions  authorized  for  AFSAC 
did  not  change,  only  the  Air  Force  Specialty  Codes  (AFSCs).33! 
£P  INXA  coordinated  preparations  for  and  served  as  the  focal 
point  for  the  AFSAC  responses  to  Management  Effectiveness  Inspections 
(MEIs)  conducted  during  1982.  Two  MEIs  of  AFSAC  elements  were 
completed  during  the  year.  AFIS/IG  conducted  an  MEI  of  Headquarters 
AFSAC  during  the  period  5-16  April.  The  Headquarters  was  rated 
"excellent"  overall.  At  the  end  of  the  year,  several  items  remained 
open  and  work  continued  to  close  out  the  report. 332 
£)  During  the  period  18  October  -  5  November,  AFIS/IG  conducted 
a  MEI  of  Headquarters  ESAA  and  its  subordinate  detachments.  In 
preparation  for  this  inspection,  INXA  arranged  for  a  "mini -inspection" 
of  all  ESAA  elements  by  Chief  Master  Sergeant  Louis  Vukich,  Detachment 
11  Superintendent.  The  thorough  preinspection  performed  by  Sergeant 
Vukich  was  in  large  part  responsible  for  the  overall  "excellent" 
rating  achieved  by  Headquarters  ESAA.333
147 
AFSAC 
1NXA  served  as  the  OPk  for  the  development  and  presentation 
of  AF5EC  mission  and  overview  briefings  for  visitors  as  well  as  for 
the  Quarterly  Management  Analysis  Review  (QMAR).  Approximately  50 
different  presentations  of  the  AFSAC  mission  briefing  were  made  during 
1982  at  Headquarters  AFSAC  (Fort  Belvoir,  Virginia),  the  Pentagon,  the 
Defense  Intelligence  School,  and  the  Armed  Forces  Air  Intelligence 
Training  Center  at  Lowry  AFB,  Colorado.  On  2  November,  Colonel 
Yankowski  presented  the  AFSAC  mission  briefing  to  the  Secretary  of  the 
Air  Force,  the  Honorable  Verne  Orr.334 
flB  The  Fiscal  Programs  Branch  (INXB)  provided  acquisition, 
maintenance,  and  allocation  of  AFSAC  resources  by  preparing 
programming  documents  and  reports,  maintaining  Defense  Intelligence 
Agencies  (DIA's)  Project  Management  File,  and  conducting  all  budget 
and  fiscal  matters. 33° 
|A  INXB  submitted  AFSAC* s  operating  budget  for  FY  85  on  3 
December  in  accordance  with  the  AFIS/AC  budget  call.  The  submission 
reflected  an  increase  of  about  30  percent  as  a  result  of  36  new 
manpower  authorizations  and  aggressive  collection  plans."' 
flfe  The  AFSAC  General  Defense  Intelligence  Program  (GDIP)  input 
for  FY  85-89  was  yery  ambitious,  including  four  new  initiatives 
requiring  42  new  manpower  authorizations  and  $856,000.  The  submission 
was  based  on  the  Program  Manaaers  Guidance  Memorandum  (PMGM)  and  the 
verbal  guidance  of  the  ACS/I. 33^ 
■P  During  an  organizational  audit  by  the  Air  Force  Audit  Agency 
in  April  and  May,  several  fiscal  management  deficiencies  were  noted 
that  prompted  Colonel  Yankowski  to  establish  a  board  of  senior 
management  officials  in  Headquarters  AFSAC  to  formulate  fiscal  policy, 
work  management  problems,  and  serve  as  a  body  to  review  the  corporate 
AFSAC  fiscal  and  resource  submissions.  He  directed  their  attention, 
in  particular,  to  programming  ,  and  expenditure  of  Intelligence 
Contingency  Funds  (ICF).  The  board  was  further  tasked  to  provide  the 
commander  a  quarterly  review  of  the  entire  AFSAC  financial  status,  to 
include  all  monies  spent  by  AFSAC.  The  board  was  formally  established 
on  21  June. 339 
*^ft  The  Career  Management  and  Training  Branch  (INXC)  was  created 
on  1  October  by  consolidating  the  training  functions  of  AFSAC/INOB 
with  the  career  management  functions  of  AFSAC/INX.  The  Pnmary 
mission  of  the  new  branch  was  to  identify,  select,  and  train  Ai-bAl 
CM 
o * 
OS 
•/■» 
H 
0) 
p. 
Q) 
w 
r-t  . 
0) 
P