Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
BY ORDER OF THE COMMANDER
46TH TEST WING
46TH TEST WING PAMPHLET 99-102
1 FEBRUARY 2012
Test and Evaluation
PROGRAMMING ENGINEER’S GUIDE
COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY
ACCESSIBILITY: Publications and forms are available for downloading or ordering on the e-
Publishing website at www.e-Publishing.af.mil
RELEASABILITY: There are no releasability restrictions on this publication
OPR: 46 TW/XPI
Supersedes: 46TWP99-102, 1 April 1996;
Change 1, 1 November 1997
Certified by: 46 TW/CC
(Col Michael T. Brewer)
Pages: 127
This Test Wing Pamphlet (TWP) provides guidance for programming engineers and establishes
responsibilities and procedures to assist the programming engineer in accomplishing the
planning, provisioning, execution, reporting, and close-out functions associated with the test
mission of the 46th Test Wing. Refer recommended changes and questions about this publication
to the Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR) using the AF Form 847, Recommendation for
Change of Publication; route AF Form 847s from the field through the appropriate functional's
chain of command. Ensure that all records created as a result of processes prescribed in this
publication are maintained in accordance with Air Force Manual (AFMAN) 33-363,
Management of Records, and disposed of in accordance with Air Force Records Information
System (AFRIMS) Records Disposition Schedule (RDS) located at
https://www.my.af.mil/afrims/afrims/afrims/rims.cfm
Welcome to the 46th Test Wing (46 TW) Program Engineer‘s Guide. The objective of this
document is to assist program engineers (PE) in accomplishing the functions associated with the
test mission of 46 TW. It provides instructions that simplify the documentation process and
promote standardization. In the event of conflict, higher headquarters operating instructions,
regulations, manuals, or technical orders will take precedence over this guide.
The standard test process delineated in this guide applies to PEs assigned to the 46 TW at Eglin
AFB, Florida, and to detachment units at other locations such as Hurlburt AFB, Florida; Wright-
Patterson AFB, Ohio; Hanscom AFB, Massachusetts; and Lackland AFB, Texas. Where
possible, the standard test process should also be incorporated into local procedures at the 46th
Test Group at Holloman AFB, New Mexico.
2 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
PEs are involved in all phases of a program: planning, execution (active), suspense, reporting,
and closeout. Additionally, they are involved with all the disciplines associated with the
program: financial management, technical support, facilities, logistics, safety, security, frequency
control and analysis (FCA), and test reporting. This guide provides PEs with a ready reference
for performing the programming and test execution functions required in conducting our T&E
mission. Use the knowledge found here to further your expertise; talk with coworkers and
supervisors, visit the test sites and facilities, and seek advice from other ―experts‖ we have in the
46 TW.
The job performed by PEs is of vital importance to our customers and to the Air Force. I believe
this guide will assist personnel in the performance of their duties and I encourage everyone to
make it a first source when questions arise.
SUMMARY OF CHANGES
This instruction updates organizational symbols and responsibilities; documents new procedures
for financial management, foreign and private industry testing, and test documentation; provides
expanded information concerning the Programming Engineer‘s (PE) responsibilities; provides
new and/or expanded information concerning security requirements, logistics support, mission
and resource scheduling, safety considerations, technical support, frequency authorizations, and
environmental considerations.
Chapter 1—MISSION AND ORGANIZATION 8
1.1. Introduction. ........................................................................................................... 8
1.2. Missions: ................................................................................................................ 8
1.3. Organizations: ........................................................................................................ 8
Chapter 2—TEST PROCESS OVERVIEW 14
2.1. Introduction. ........................................................................................................... 14
2.2. Test Facilities. ........................................................................................................ 19
2.3. Types of Tests. ....................................................................................................... 15
Figure 2.1. 46 TW 8 Step Standard Test Process ..................................................................... 15
2.4. Test Process. .......................................................................................................... 15
Figure 2.2. Test Philosophy ...................................................................................................... 16
2.5. Test Philosophy. ..................................................................................................... 16
Chapter 3—THE PROGRAMMING PROCESS 17
3.1. Introduction: ........................................................................................................... 17
Figure 3.1. The Programming Process ..................................................................................... 17
3.2. Caller Log (paragraph 13. ...................................................................................... 18
3.3. Test Request (TR) (paragraphs 13. ........................................................................ 18
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 3
3.4. Job Order Number (JON) (paragraph 13. .............................................................. 18
3.5. Planning Funds (paragraph 13. .............................................................................. 18
3.6. Kickoff Meeting (paragraph 13. ............................................................................ 19
3.7. Environmental Impact Analysis (paragraph 13. .................................................... 18
3.8. Targets (paragraph 11. ........................................................................................... 19
3.6. 5). ........................................................................................................................... 19
3.9. Aircraft Modifications/Changes (paragraph 13. .................................................... 19
3.10. Munitions (paragraph 6. ......................................................................................... 19
2.2. 4). ........................................................................................................................... 19
3.11. Contracts. ............................................................................................................... 19
3.12. Security (Chapter 5). .............................................................................................. 19
3.13. Equipment and Supplies (Chapter 6). .................................................................... 19
3.14. Test Acceptance (paragraph 13. ............................................................................. 19
3.15. Statement of Capability (SOC) (paragraph 13. ...................................................... 20
3.16. Baselining the Test (paragraphs 4. ......................................................................... 20
3.17. Funding (paragraph 8. ............................................................................................ 20
3.18. Test Suspension or Termination (paragraph 13. .................................................... 20
3.19. Flight Clearances (paragraph 13. ........................................................................... 20
3.20. Appendices (Chapters 6, 10, and 11). .................................................................... 20
3.21. Radio Frequency Authorization (RFA) (Chapter 12). ........................................... 20
3.22. Technical Review Board (TRB). ........................................................................... 20
3.23. Risk Management Board (RMB) (paragraph 10. ................................................... 20
3.24. Test Directive (TD) (paragraph 13. ....................................................................... 21
3.25. Airborne Test Review/Safety Board (ATR/SB) (paragraph 10. ............................ 21
3.26. EVA (paragraph 4. ................................................................................................. 21
3.27. Test Oversight (paragraphs 4. ................................................................................ 21
4.2. and 13. .................................................................................................................... 23
3.28. Test Reporting. ....................................................................................................... 21
3.29. Closeout (paragraph 13. ......................................................................................... 21
2.15. 4). ........................................................................................................................... 22
3.30. Exceptions to the Normal Process. ........................................................................ 22
Chapter 4—FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 23
4.1. Introduction. ........................................................................................................... 23
4 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
4.2. Work Breakdown Structure (WBS). ...................................................................... 23
Table 4.1. WBS Level Definitions .......................................................................................... 24
Figure 4.1. Indentured Work Breakdown Structure ................................................................. 25
Figure 4.2. Pictorial Work Breakdown Structure ..................................................................... 25
4.3. Cost/Schedule Estimates. ....................................................................................... 26
4.4. Cost Tracking/Program Management. ................................................................... 27
4.5. T&E Facilities Funded by One or More DoD Customers. .................................... 30
4.6. Training Customers. ............................................................................................... 30
4.7. Pass Through Using a DoD Organization. ............................................................. 30
4.8. Glossary of Financial Terms and Procedures: ....................................................... 31
4.8. 1 Accounting Classifications. ................................................................................ 31
Table 4.2. Accounting Classification Breakdown .................................................................. 31
Table 4.3. Federal Agency or Department Codes ................................................................... 31
Table 4.4. Appropriation Types .............................................................................................. 32
Table 4.5. Fund Types ............................................................................................................ 32
4.9. Antideficiency Act (ADA). .................................................................................... 32
4.10. Direct Cost. ............................................................................................................ 34
4.11. Indirect Cost. .......................................................................................................... 34
4.12. Acceleration of Labor Rates. ................................................................................. 34
4.13. Fiscal Year. ............................................................................................................ 34
4.14. Funds Status. .......................................................................................................... 34
4.15. Commencement of Work. ...................................................................................... 34
4.16. Excess Funds Balance Management. ..................................................................... 35
4.17. Job Order Cost Accounting System. ...................................................................... 35
4.18. Common Funding Documents: .............................................................................. 35
Table 4.6. Work Phase Code Definitions ................................................................................ 36
Figure 4.3. Test Pricing Decision Tree ..................................................................................... 37
Figure 4.4. Reimbursement Matrix .......................................................................................... 38
Chapter 5—SECURITY 39
5.1. Introduction. ........................................................................................................... 39
5.2. Security Badges. .................................................................................................... 39
5.3. Access Lists/Entry Authority Lists (EAL)/Base Access. ....................................... 39
Figure 5.1. Request for Access/Entry Authority Lists ............................................................. 41
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 5
5.4. Communications Security (COMSEC). ................................................................. 42
5.5. Operations Security (OPSEC). ............................................................................... 42
5.6. 46th Test Wing Security Office. ............................................................................ 42
5.7. Physical Security. ................................................................................................... 42
5.8. Access to Central Control Facility (CCF). ............................................................. 43
Figure 5.2. Request for CCF Access ........................................................................................ 44
Figure 5.3. Request for CCF Access for Foreign Personnel .................................................... 46
5.9. Access to Test Sites/Ranges: ................................................................................. 47
Figure 5.4. Request for Test Site Access .................................................................................. 48
Figure 5.5. Request for Test Area Access for Foreign Visitor ................................................. 50
5.10. Access to Technical Library: ................................................................................. 51
5.11. Security Classification Guides (SCG): .................................................................. 51
5.12. Guards/Guard Service: ........................................................................................... 51
Figure 5.6. Request for Technical Library Access for Contractor Personnel ........................... 53
5.13. Foreign Disclosure Security. .................................................................................. 54
5.14. Computer Security (COMPUSEC). ....................................................................... 55
5.15. Storage Containers: ................................................................................................ 56
5.16. Secure Rooms. ....................................................................................................... 56
5.17. Destruction of Classified. ....................................................................................... 56
5.18. Safeguarding Classified. ........................................................................................ 56
5.19. Transmission of Classified: .................................................................................... 56
5.20. Classified or Other Sensitive Conferences/Meetings. ............................................ 57
5.21. Classified Munition Items. ..................................................................................... 58
5.22. Industrial Security: ................................................................................................. 58
5.23. Emanation Security (EMSEC) (Formerly TEMPEST). ......................................... 58
5.24. Scientific and Technical Information (STINFO). .................................................. 58
5.25. Release of Information to the Public: .................................................................... 58
5.26. Test Directives. ...................................................................................................... 59
Chapter 6—LOGISTICS SUPPORT 61
6.1. Introduction. ........................................................................................................... 61
6.2. Logistics Support Appendix (LSA): ...................................................................... 61
6.3. Distribution. ........................................................................................................... 67
6.4. Logistics Support Checklist. .................................................................................. 67
6 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Table 6.1. Logistics Support Checklist ................................................................................... 67
Chapter 7—INTERNATIONAL TEST PLANNING AND DOCUMENTATION 70
7.1. Introduction: ........................................................................................................... 70
7.2. Foreign Military Sales Tests: ................................................................................. 70
Figure 7.1. Foreign Military Sales Process .............................................................................. 71
7.3. Foreign Comparative Testing (FCT). .................................................................... 72
Chapter 8—PRIVATE INDUSTRY TEST PLANNING AND DOCUMENTATION 73
8.1. Introduction. ........................................................................................................... 73
8.2. Commercial Test Contracts: .................................................................................. 73
8.3. Technology Transfer (T2) Agreements: ................................................................ 75
Figure 8.1. CRADA Flags ........................................................................................................ 76
Table 8.2. Technology Transfer (T2) Mechanisms ................................................................. 77
Chapter 9—MISSIONS AND RESOURCE SCHEDULING 81
9.1. Introduction. ........................................................................................................... 81
9.2. Center Scheduling Enterprise (CSE). .................................................................... 81
9.3. Mission Scheduling. ............................................................................................... 81
9.4. Scheduling Cycle. .................................................................................................. 81
9.5. Scheduling Priority. ............................................................................................... 81
9.6. Late Mission Requests. .......................................................................................... 81
9.7. Mission Cancellation/Withdrawal. ........................................................................ 82
9.8. Early Turn-On: ....................................................................................................... 82
Figure 9.1. Checklist for Early Turn-On .................................................................................. 83
Chapter 10—SAFETY 84
10.1. Introduction. ........................................................................................................... 84
10.2. Range Safety (AAC/SEU): .................................................................................... 84
10.3. Systems Safety (AAC/SES): .................................................................................. 86
10.4. Weapons Safety (AAC/SEW): ............................................................................... 88
10.5. Flight Safety (AAC/SEF): ...................................................................................... 88
10.6. Ground Safety (AAC/SEG): .................................................................................. 89
Chapter 11—TECHNICAL SUPPORT 90
11.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................ 90
11.2. Technical Support Organization: ........................................................................... 90
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 7
11.3. Technical Planning. ............................................................................................... 94
11.4. Reference Materials: .............................................................................................. 97
Chapter 12—FREQUENCY AUTHORIZATIONS 98
12.1. Introduction. ........................................................................................................... 98
12.2. Frequency Management. ........................................................................................ 98
12.3. Frequency Control and Analysis (FCA). ............................................................... 98
Chapter 13—DOCUMENTATION 100
13.1. Introduction. ........................................................................................................... 100
13.2. Programming Engineer-Prepared Documentation. ................................................ 100
Figure 13.1. Planning Factors .................................................................................................... 102
13.3. Other Test-Related Documentation. ...................................................................... 107
13.4. PE Project Folder. .................................................................................................. 107
Chapter 14—ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROCESS (EIAP) 109
14.1. Introduction. ........................................................................................................... 109
14.2. Procedures: ............................................................................................................. 109
14.3. Reassessments. ....................................................................................................... 111
14.4. Tests at Sites Other Than Eglin. ............................................................................ 111
Figure 14.1. Suggested Organization and Content of a DOPAA ............................................... 112
Figure 14.2. Example of Completed DOPAA ............................................................................ 114
Chapter 15—POINTS OF CONTACT 117
15.1. Points of Contact .................................................................................................... 117
Table 15.1. Points of Contact .................................................................................................... 117
Attachment 1—GLOSSARY OF REFERENCES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION 122
8 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Chapter 1
MISSION AND ORGANIZATION
1.1. Introduction. This chapter is intended to introduce you to the organizations at Eglin with
which a Programming Engineer (PE) interacts. You should understand where a PE fits into the
overall scheme as well your own organization. In the following paragraphs you'll find the Air
Force and Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC) Mission Statements, along with the core
purposes of the Air Armament Center (AAC) and a brief overview of the AAC organization.
The organizations at Eglin are then listed and briefly described.
1.2. Missions:
1.2.1. Air Force Mission Statement. The mission of the United States Air Force is to fly,
fight and win - in air, space and cyberspace.
1.2.2. Air Force Materiel Command Mission Statement. Deliver war-winning…technology,
acquisition, test, sustainment…expeditionary capabilities to the warfighter.
1.2.3. Air Armament Center. AAC is responsible for development, acquisition, testing,
deployment, and sustainment of all air-delivered non-nuclear weapons. AAC applies
advanced technology, engineering, and programming efficiencies across the entire product
life cycle to provide superior combat capability. AAC plans, directs, and conducts Test and
Evaluation (T&E) of U.S. and allied air armament, navigation and guidance systems, and
command and control systems and supports the largest base mobility commitment in the Air
Force. AAC accomplishes its mission through three components: the 46th Test Wing, 96th
Air Base Wing, and the 308th Armament Systems Wing.
1.2.4. 46th Test Wing (46 TW). The 46th Test Wing is the test and evaluation center for Air
Force air-delivered weapons, navigation and guidance systems, Command and Control (C2)
systems, and Air Force Special Operations Command systems. The Eglin Gulf Test Range
provides approximately 130,000 square miles of over water airspace. World-class technical
facilities and natural resources coupled with the creative thinking of the 46 TW staff produce
affordable technical solutions to contemporary technical problems. The Wing's knowledge
and expertise earned after years of test and evaluation can be used to solve both military and
commercial issues.
1.3. Organizations:
1.3.1. AAC. A listing of some of the AAC staff organizations with whom a PE may
interface follows.
1.3.1.1. Intelligence Division (AAC/XR2) - This organization is the intelligence support
for AAC. You may become involved with this organization if you need to develop a
realistic threat or target for your test program.
1.3.1.2. Safety Office (AAC/SE) - This office is one of the primary staff functions you
will become intimately involved with. Various portions of the test process directly
involve the safety professionals.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 9
1.3.1.3. Public Affairs Office (AAC/PA) - If your test program brings you into the media
spotlight, you'll be working with this office. Any information released outside DoD
channels goes through them.
1.3.2. 46th Test Wing (46 TW). The 46 TW manages the T&E process for AAC. To
perform this task, the 46 TW is equipped with aircraft of various types and highly
instrumented ground facilities. To accomplish its mission, the 46 TW manages all the land
test ranges located throughout the 724-square-mile Eglin land range complex, as well as over
130,000 square miles of water ranges in the adjacent Gulf of Mexico. Major tests on or
above AAC ranges involve all types of equipment, including aircraft systems, subsystems,
missiles, guns, bombs, rockets, targets and drones, high-powered radars, and C4ISR systems.
1.3.2.1. 46 TW Plans Office (46 TW/XP). The major responsibility of 46 TW/XP is to
develop long-range plans. It is also responsible for overseeing 46 TW information
technology administration and standards and office automation, and for resource
utilization analysis.
1.3.2.2. 46 TW Financial Management (46 TW/FM). 46 TW/FM is responsible for
managing the 46 TW budget and Job Order Cost Accounting System (JOCAS) functions.
1.3.2.3. 46th Operations Group (46 OG). 46 OG designs and executes flight and ground
DT&E on USAF conventional weapons, countermeasures, and C2 systems; operates a
fleet of uniquely modified F-15, F-16, C-130, A-10, and UH-1N test aircraft and provides
base support airfield management, air traffic control, and weather; manages operations
programs, including ground and flight test operations, unit training, flying hours, and
standardization and evaluation of aircrews and engineers; approves flight management
actions for the AAC commander; and prepares test directives involving 46 TW test
assets.
1.3.2.3.1. 40th Flight Test Squadron (40 FLTS). 40 FLTS provides the expertise for
F-15, F-16, A-10, and UH-1 flight testing; conducts and reports on assigned test
programs to include guided and unguided munitions, associated carriage, launch, and
support equipment, avionics systems, aerial target systems, and range instrumentation
systems; develops test methodology, determines and modifies requirements for test
resources, accomplishes data analysis, and prepares technical reports, data packages,
or letter reports for assigned tests; develops programs for aircrew and engineering;
and administers flying safety programs.
1.3.2.3.2. 46th Test Squadron (46 TS). 46 TS provides the expertise for C4ISR and
electronic systems testing; conducts tests of C4ISR systems, passive and active sensor
systems, and emitters that exploit the electromagnetic spectrum; provides a complete
test process to customers (planning, budgeting, execution, and reporting); plans,
manages, and conducts tests of electronic, electro-optic (EO), infrared (IR),
millimeter wave (MMW), security sensors, and C4ISR hardware/software, including
both active and passive countermeasure systems; provides a world-class center of
expertise for T&E of Mission Planning Systems; provides the expertise for tactical
datalink and communications systems testing; and provides the expertise for
Information Assurance testing.
10 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
1.3.2.3.3. 780th Test Squadron (780 TS). 780 TS provides the expertise for
nonnuclear munitions testing and is the focal point for air-to-air missile testing, air-to-
surface munitions testing, live fire lethality testing, and ground testing; executes the
munitions test process; provides comprehensive test support and project management
for all assigned test programs; plans, programs, conducts, analyzes, and reports on
tests of air-to-air missile systems and subsystems; conducts T&E of smart munitions
and related technologies to determine performance against fixed critical mobile and
mobile ground tactical targets; manages munitions tests in the areas of
weapons/avionics system integration, navigation systems, and guided weapons;
conducts T&E of weapon seeker/sensor technology to include EO, IR, MMW,
seismic, acoustic, and magnetic; plans, conducts, analyzes, and reports munitions
tests involving terminal effects, weapon lethality, guidance systems performance,
target vulnerability, warhead characterization, anti-armor, direct fire (guns), fuzes,
ejection racks, and munitions support equipment; develops test documentation;
provides test, test support, consultation, and maintains liaison with mission-related
agencies of the Air Force, Army, and Navy; and manages and reports on test financial
status
1.3.2.3.4. 46th Operations Support Squadron (46 OSS). 46 OSS provides direction
for host base responsibilities of airfield operations, air traffic control, and flight
records management; schedules all assets necessary to accomplish the 46 TW
developmental test missions to include land and water ranges; operates the Range
Operations Control Center (ROCC) to provide real-time mission control; manages all
aspects of aircraft maintenance and aircrew life support activities; coordinates all
personnel management activities, training programs, and acquisition of test aircraft;
and oversees all aspects of OG financial management and technical support for all
test programs.
1.3.2.3.4.1. Joint Exercise and Training Branch (46 OSS/OSPJ). Provides Fixed
Targets, Mobile Surface Targets, Remote Control Surface Targets, and Range
Facilities.
1.3.2.3.4.2. Special Projects Branch (46 OSS/OSPA). Provides test program
support to Eglin Gulf Range Complex customers who do not require test
engineering design support and test reports.
1.3.2.3.4.3. Range Scheduling Branch (46 OSS/OSO). Provides scheduling
services for the 46th Test Wing, manages the Joint Test and Training Operations
Control Center (JTTOCC), and is responsible for the electromagnetic
environment of the Eglin Range Complex, including Test Site A-6.
1.3.2.3.4.4. Frequency Control and Analysis (FCA) Branch (46 OSS/OSOF).
Ensures the adequacy and integrity of the entire radio frequency spectrum for all
46 TW test and training programs. They are responsible for FCA of all
radio/electromagnetic/ECM test equipment and resource instrumentation and
provide communications assistance to test planners, PEs, and other users of the
Eglin complex.
1.3.2.3.4.5. Technical Reports Office (46 OSS/OSXR). Serves as 46 TW
Scientific and Technical Information (STINFO) focal point and provides guidance
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 11
for preparation and dissemination of 46 TW test documentation and STINFO.
1.3.2.3.5. 46th Weather Flight (46 WF). The 46 WF provides base weather support
and staff meteorological services to the operations, research, development, and T&E
activities at Eglin and its complex of land and water test ranges. In addition, the 46
WF provides data inputs to DoD databases to support the worldwide Air Force
Weather Support System.
1.3.2.3.6. 46th Operations Group Standardization/Evaluation (46 OG/OGV)
supervises and manages the 46 TW Aircrew Standardization and Evaluation Program;
administers aircrew ground and flight evaluations; inspects wing aircrew training
programs and flight procedures; and provides regular reports on aircrew proficiency
to 46 TW and 46 OG commanders.
1.3.2.3.7. 413th Flight Test Squadron (413 FLTS), Hurlburt Field, Florida, directs
and manages Special Operations Forces (SOF) DT&E and Qualification Test and
Evaluation (QT&E) to include all SOF fixed and rotary wing aircraft. Specific
responsibilities include planning tests, preparing cost data, arranging test support,
conducting test missions, and reporting test results; coordinates with AAC, Air Force
Special Operations Command (AFSOC), program offices, and other
government/civilian agencies to accomplish their test mission; and is tasked to work
closely with ultimate user (AFSOC) to ensure concurrent DT&E and Operational Test
and Evaluation (OT&E) are conducted whenever possible
1.3.2.4. Air Force SEEK EAGLE Office (46 SK) manages and conducts AFSEO
compatibility engineering and analysis support for USAF aircraft-store certification
programs; establishes safe carriage/employment envelopes, issues recommended flight
clearances and certification recommendations, and conducts ballistic accuracy
verification; and develops/maintains automated mission planning software and other
technical order products
1.3.2.5. 46th Maintenance Group (46 MXG) provides aircraft on- and off-equipment
repair capability and provides ground support equipment for flightline operations,
provides metal fabrication support services for test aircraft temporary (T-2)
modifications, and provides munitions storage. 46 MXG consists of three separate
squadrons: the 46th Maintenance Operations Squadron (46 MOS), 46th Maintenance
Squadron (46 MXS) and 46th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron (46 AMXS). Several
backshop functions are provided by contractors. 46 MXG also provides logistics test
planning and logistical support for tests/tasks accepted by the 46 TW and manages and
maintains a fleet of uniquely modified F-15, F-16, A-10, and UH-1N test aircraft.
1.3.2.6. 46th Range Group (46 RANG) is responsible for the overall management of 46
TW test areas and facilities, and for providing technical and engineering services
including airborne and ground instrumentation required to support the 46 TW test
workload. 46 RANG is primary source for test data, is responsible for investment
planning for future capabilities, and manages the range Operations and Maintenance
(O&M) contractor. Additionally, 46 RANG is responsible for overall management of the
46 TW major ground test facilities (MGTF), including test planning and execution at
these facilities and preparing test documentation for testing at the MGTF.
12 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
1.3.2.6.1. 46 Range Control Squadron (46 RNCS) provides data reduction services
for ground and flight tests, supports base communications and computer operations
and acts as a pipeline for data collected on the range, and provides data analysis
capability as required. The TE will interact with this organization through the Central
Control Facility (CCF) during active flight testing.
1.3.2.6.2. Central Control Facility (CCF). Airborne missions are typically monitored
for both aircraft control and mission accomplishment through resources provided in
the CCF. CCF mission rooms are equipped with radio and landline communications
access and provide standard aircraft control and range safety monitoring displays
along with the Flight Termination System, which is used to terminate munitions tests
if necessary. In addition, the CCF provides customized mission support and real-time
(R/T) analysis displays using all available Time-Space-Position Information (TSPI)
and telemetry sources. The CCF is staffed at mission execution time by a test support
manager who has overall responsibility for CCF support resources; a weapons
controller who vectors aircraft on the range, and a range controller who controls range
facilities. The TE is responsible for briefing these support staffers on the desired
conduct and outcome of the mission.
1.3.2.6.3. 46th Test Systems Squadron, Operations and Maintenance (O&M)
Contracts Management Branch (46 TSSQ/RNXC). The 46 TSSQ/RNXC manages
the core O&M contract that provides the mission oriented capabilities of the Eglin
Test and Training Complex (ETTC). The following services and support activities
are provided via the contract and the O&M contractor: Provide O&M of the test
areas, the test and training facilities, and the technical facilities; Provide support for
range system design/modification/range configuration of both airborne and ground
instrumentation; and Provide various services for logistical and administrative
support.
1.3.2.6.4. 782nd Test Squadron (782 TS). The 782TS develops and maintains
engineering expertise, facilities, equipment, and instrumentation systems to conduct
testing of armament systems, electronic combat systems, and aircraft systems in a
simulated test environment. The squadron conducts ground testing at a component,
subsystem and system level. The installed systems test facilities provide the capability
to test items in extreme climatic conditions as well as in electromagnetically
controlled environments. Hardware-in-the-loop simulators provide extensive pre-
flight testing capabilities for armament systems. Additionally, the squadron designs,
develops, and maintains instrumentation to provide ultraviolet, visible, infrared,
millimeter wave, and laser signature measurements and supports seeker/sensor test
support in the field. The 782TS is composed of the Installed Systems Test Flight,
Guided Weapons Test Flight and the Seekers and Sensors Test Flight.
1.3.2.6.4.1. The Installed Systems Test Flight (782TS/RNWP) consists of the
Climatic Lab Section and the Integrated Systems Test Section and conducts
testing on systems and components in their installed configuration on a variety of
weapon and aircraft platforms. It operates the McKinley Climatic Laboratory
(MCL) and the Joint Preflight Integration of Munitions and Electronics Systems
(J-PRIMES) facility.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 13
1.3.2.6.4.2. The Guided Weapons Test Flight (782TS/RNWG) operates the Air
Force‘s premiere weapon hardware-in-the-loop test facility – the Guided
Weapons Evaluation Facility. The Guided Weapons Test Flight consists of the
Hardware Systems Section and Software Systems Section.
1.3.2.6.4.3. The Seekers and Sensors Test Flight (782TS/RNWI) performs field
tests of seekers and sensors and provides complete characterization of target and
background spectral signatures. The Seekers and Sensors Test Flight consists of
the EO/IR Test Section, the RF/MMW Test Section, and the Seekers Test Section.
1.3.2.7. 46th Test Group (46 TG). The 46 TG at Holloman Air Force Base, New
Mexico, has unique facilities that include a 10-mile, high-speed test track and two radar
signature measurement facilities, the Radar Target Scatter (RATSCAT) facility and the
Central Inertial Guidance Test Facility (CIGTF). They also operate the RATSCAT
Advanced Measurement Systems (RAMS) and T-38 test support aircraft. Adjacent to the
White Sands Missile Range (WSMR), the 46 TG is the largest geographically separated
unit reporting to the 46 TW. The 46 TG hosts the 46 TW testing deployed to Holloman.
1.3.3. 96th Air Base Wing (96 ABW). The 96 ABW provides base operations services to
more than 70,000 active duty, civilian, and retired personnel and their dependents residing in
Northwest Florida. The 96 ABW comprises the following groups.
1.3.3.1. 96th Medical Group (96 MDG). The 96 MDG provides quality medical care for
more than 70,000 active duty personnel, dependents, and retirees living in Northwest
Florida. The TE might need to work with the Bioenvironmental Engineering Flight on
test projects that need to define areas of hazardous radiation (and other areas such as laser
use, noise, etc) for personnel.
1.3.3.2. 96th Mission Support Group (96 MSG). The 96 MSG provides Aerospace
Expeditionary Force readiness, fuels, supply, and transportation, ground combat training,
security, personnel, education, family services, lodging, food service, recreation and
logistics planning and deployment support to over 20,000 Team Eglin military and
civilian personnel and 43,000 retirees. It deploys combat ready forces in support of
worldwide contingency operations. The 96 MSG also provides security and law
enforcement to the entire Eglin community, including its vast land ranges, and special
security for multimillion-dollar test facilities. Centralized support is also provided in the
areas of food service, lodging, mortuary affairs, honor guard, Morale, Welfare and
Recreation (MWR), and military and civilian personnel functions.
1.3.3.3. 96th Civil Engineer Group (96 CEG). The 96 CEG manages real property
construction and fire protection and also provides range Explosive Ordinance Disposal
(EOD). Other functions include disaster preparedness/recovery support, utilities, road
building and maintenance, unique environmental programs, supply, and resource
management. CE is usually tasked in the construction of unique test facilities required
for munitions testing. If you're involved in the testing of munitions, you will deal with
EOD at some point.
14 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Chapter 2
TEST PROCESS OVERVIEW
2.1. Introduction. The Air Force acquisition process includes testing to provide risk reduction
prior to fielding new or modified systems. Early involvement of knowledgeable testers in the
system design process can help the test program meet the requirements of the System Program
Office (SPO) and other DoD organizations, labs, the Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency, etc., to expend minimum resources on testing while providing adequate proof the
system meets requirements. These requirements are usually derived from the Initial Capabilities
Document (ICD) and the Capability Development Document (CDD), which are provided by the
user and the SPO System Requirements Specification (SRS). The SPO produces a Test and
Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP) in which the overall scheme of testing required to field the
system is outlined. The Responsible Test Organization (RTO) is tasked to ensure the system is
tested and to determine whether the system has met specification requirements. An acquisition
program's Program Management Directive (PMD), TEMP, or the Program Executive Officer
(PEO) usually designates the RTO by name. AFMC has three primary test execution
organizations: the 46th Test Wing at Eglin, Air Force Flight Test Center (AFFTC) at Edwards
Air Force Base, California, and Arnold Engineering and Development Center, Arnold Air Force
Base, Tennessee.
2.2. Test Facilities. For general information about various test facilities, go to the Eglin Test
and Training Complex Overview on the Air Force Portal. In addition, AAC Technical Facilities
Volumes I, II, and III provide an in-depth look at the various Eglin test resources. While
Volume III is classified, Volume II is an online resource (see Useful Links menu option in the
Test Process Tool, Technical Facilities Manual).
2.2.1. Range Configuration Control Committee (RC3). The RC3 ensures that the
configuration of the AAC range is controlled to prevent uncoordinated changes to the
documented range configuration and uncoordinated activities that will conflict with each
other. The RC3 provides guidance on the process that must be followed by any proponent if
a test or training program is proposing to make a change to the features or use of the Eglin
Range Complex (i.e.: build a permanent structure on a Test Area or in the Interstitial Area,
erect a tower, make changes to range roads, perform scientific investigation or research that's
not Eglin-generated, etc). The RC3 is co-chaired by 46 OG/CA and 46 RANG/TD.
2.2.2. Range Configuration Control Process. The Proponent enters the process by
articulating the requirement to Test Wing personnel who will help compare it to the existing
Eglin Range Plans for consistency with range development policy. This step will frequently
result in scoping the proposal to focus planning effort away from non-viable alternatives. It
will also aid in development of a Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives (DOPAA)
that‘s vital to the environmental impact analysis process. With assistance from the TW
liaison, the proponent presents the range use proposal to the RC3 for review, resulting in
approval or denial, frequently with direction. At the completion of that step, the proposal is
briefed to the Range Development Executive Steering Committee (RDESC), either as an
approved proposal (for information), or as a proposal with amplifying remarks from the RC3
(for review). Once the proposal has been approved by the RDESC, either in concept or in
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 15
full, the proponent is then empowered to proceed with submitting the AF Form 813 to
CEVSP and the AF Form 332 to CE, as necessary.
2.3. Types of Tests. Five types of testing are conducted at Eglin: DT&E, OT&E, QT&E,
Foreign Military Sales (FMS), and commercial. The purpose of DT&E is to determine whether
system requirements are met, whereas the purpose of OT&E is to determine whether the system
is operationally suitable and effective. DT&E at Eglin is performed by the 46 TW, while OT&E
is performed under the Air Combat Command by the 53d Wing, or AFOTEC. QT&E is a
modified form of DT&E conducted on Commercial-Off-the-Shelf (COTS) items, Non-
Developmental Items (NDI), and Government-Furnished Equipment (GFE). FMS tests are those
conducted by the 46 TW for a foreign government. Commercial tests are those conducted by the
46 TW for commercial customers using government facilities. In DT&E, tests are conducted as
either RTO or Participating Test Organization (PTO) tests. PTO tests are performed by an
organization tasked by the RTO. The organization conducting the test is commonly referred to
as the Test Execution Organization (TEO). A unique part of the testing at Eglin is done by the
Air Force Seek Eagle Office (AFSEO), which is tasked to provide certification on all new or
changed external stores on all Air Force aircraft.
Figure 2.1. 46 TW 8 Step Standard Test Process
2.4. Test Process. The test process, which is discussed in DoD Instruction 5000.2 (see Useful
Links menu option in the Test Process Tool for link) is designed to encourage acquisition
16 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
programs to plan for and execute tests in an orderly and defined manner. A view of the 8-step
standard test process used by the 46 TW is shown in Figure 2.1. Overall test processes for
different types of systems acquired by the AF are defined in documents such as the Defense
Acquisition Guidebook (see Useful Links menu option in the Test Process Tool for link).
Figure 2.2. Test Philosophy
2.5. Test Philosophy. Eglin is a proponent of the test philosophy shown in Figure 2.2. This
figure shows initial computer simulation for a new system accomplishing the most tests. As the
system matures, you proceed through brass board integration, hardware-in-the-loop testing
(Guided Weapons Evaluation Facility (GWEF)), and installed testing (McKinley Climatic
Laboratory and Joint Preflight Integration of Munitions and Electronic Systems (J-PRIMES)).
These tests rely heavily on simulation and modeling capabilities at Eglin and are used to allow
the system to mature before proceeding to the final test phase. Final testing is open-air testing
with actual hardware on Eglin or other ranges. Since open-air testing is the most expensive type,
the test philosophy minimizes cost and risk by using modeling and simulation, and Design of
Experiments (DOE) tools whenever possible.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 17
Chapter 3
THE PROGRAMMING PROCESS
3.1. Introduction:
3.1.1. This section describes the programming process by defining the sub-processes that
take the PE from the first telephonic contact with a potential customer through the final
closeout of the test activity. The programming process (Figure 3.1) to be discussed is generic
and includes most of the sub-processes needed to complete a test. The programming process,
which is actually the test process, can take several years or be as short as a month or two. As
mentioned previously, it encompasses numerous sub-processes, producing either an action or
a product, which are dependent upon each other. There are additional sub-processes for
foreign and commercial tests, which are discussed in Chapters 7 and 8 of this guide.
Procedures for quick reaction, short suspense, and national level testing are covered in the
Eglin AFB (EAFB) Plan 70, Command-Directed Rapid Response Testing Plan (see Useful
Links menu option in the Test Process Tool for link).
Figure 3.1. The Programming Process
3.1.2. The PE‘s role in this process is to coordinate stakeholder activities, ensuring that the
customer‘s requirements are met within the funding and scheduling constraints agreed upon.
18 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
As you use this guide, think of each sub-process as a task and the guide will provide the tools
to do that task. Note: Paragraph or chapter numbers for in-depth description of the
document and the procedures are provided with each sub-process to allow you to quickly find
the tool you require within the guide.
3.2. Caller Log (paragraph 13 2.1). A call is tracked as an informal communication between
a customer and an organization within the 46 TW that may result in a new task or test.
Normally, information (such as resources, cost estimates, and schedule) is requested by the
customer, or the customer may ask the PE to provide a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM)
estimate of the test cost. After contact with a potential customer, the PE should record the
contact using the Caller Log function in the 46 TW Test Process Tool. Information discussed
with the potential customer should be included in the log.
3.3. Test Request (TR) (paragraphs 13. 2.3). The TR is any document from the customer to
the PE which establishes the need for a test, the objectives of the test, the estimated schedule, and
other information for the PE to start the planning process. This initiates the formal test
acceptance process. Examples of a test request are Test Information Sheets (TIS), a Program
Introduction Document (PID), and support requests via letter or e-mail.
3.4. Job Order Number (JON) (paragraph 13 2.5). Every test and task done at Eglin is
identified with a JON. The JON is annotated on all requests, tasks, schedule requests, and
funding documentation. It ties together all work performed and charges accrued for that
test/task. The initial AAC priority is established when the JON is created using criteria provided
by the PE. The priority is dynamic throughout the life of the program based on scheduling
criticality and puts the test/task in the queue for all activities such as scheduling, supplies,
modification work, etc. A JON is established using the Test Wing Enterprise System (TWES)
Test Process Tool (TPT).
3.5. Planning Funds (paragraph 13 2.7). Sufficient planning funds should be requested to
enable the required detailed planning in preparation for a full SOC. Planning funds should also
be requested to cover the cost of target buildup, modifications, test planning, travel, long lead
items, etc. Planning funds are highly desired but are not mandatory to begin planning however,
reimbursable work will not start until an order is received or known to exist. Emergency or quick
response T&E support may be provided in the absence of an order; when approved by the T&E
activity commander/civilian director or comptroller (AFMCI 65-602, paragraph 2.1.6). Once
received, however, the planning Performance Measurement Baseline (PMB) must be established
in EVCAS so charges can be accrued and tracked against these planning funds.
3.6. Kickoff Meeting (paragraph 13 2.8). The PE must gather detailed requirements from the
customer and coordinate the requirements with applicable stakeholders. The PE may call a
meeting of stakeholders to begin the formal planning process or may use other communication
techniques. The bottom line is to ensure contact is made with everyone who will play a part in
preparing for and executing the customer‘s request for test support. Resources, support
requirements, safety and security issues, etc., must be addressed to provide the necessary details
for the PE to prepare the Test Acceptance worksheet in TPT that will allow management to
review and provide formal acceptance of the work.
3.7. Environmental Impact Analysis (paragraph 13 2.10 and Chapter 14). AF Form 813,
Request for Environmental Impact Analysis, is mandatory to determine if your test will impact
the environment on the Eglin Test and Training Range or any area other than another federal test
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 19
facility. The larger and more involved the test, the longer it takes to accomplish. Using tools
such as the Geographic Information System (GIS) Eglin Internet Website (see Useful Links
menu option in the Test Process Tool for link to the UEC Environmental Tools, A to Z Index)
and Programmatic Environmental Assessments (PEA) as they become available, the PE performs
a preliminary environmental impact analysis for early planning purposes to incorporate
scheduling and funding requirements for an Environmental Assessment when needed. The PE
may contact the Unit Environmental Coordinator (UEC), Environmental Planning (46 TW/XPE),
the Environmental Analysis Branch (96CEG/CEVSP), and any other environmental points of
contact listed in Chapter 15 for assistance, if needed. The purpose of this effort is to expose
potential environmental issues and long lead time items, and provide the customer with this
information for consideration during their planning processes. This information should also
expose any data gaps that may hinder further environmental analysis, thereby allowing the
customer to provide environmental and operational data that could enhance timeliness and
quality of the eventual Environmental Impact Analysis Process.
3.8. Targets (paragraph 11
3.6. 5). Start planning for targets early. Some items, such as airborne targets, may require long
lead times or even kill authorization. Target planning occurs from anytime after the TR up to the
point when test conduct is over and when the range may require cleanup.
3.9. Aircraft Modifications/Changes (paragraph 13 2.11). Aircraft modifications/changes
may be required to support a test. These may be software, firmware, or hardware. This may
require a long lead time to schedule and to order the required materials. Different procedures
apply depending upon whether the change is considered a modification or a minor change.
Modifications can be accomplished at Eglin or at a contractor‘s plant. Also, the PE must
determine if removal of the modification/change will be required at the end of the test.
3.10. Munitions (paragraph 6
2.2. 4). There is a process to have munitions available to support tests. Some customers will
provide the munitions or you may have to requisition in order to have the munitions on-hand at
the time of your test. This could be a long lead-time item.
3.11. Contracts. An engineering or support contract for personnel or equipment may be
necessary.
3.12. Security (Chapter 5). Security requirements should be addressed early if construction is
required or special equipment/supplies (safes, computers, etc.) are needed. Communications
Security (COMSEC) may require equipment and encryption devices that take a great deal of
coordination.
3.13. Equipment and Supplies (Chapter 6). If computers, data reduction equipment, cameras,
etc., are required for the test and need to be ordered, you will need to deal with the supply
system. Ordering can be a long lead item and AAC involvement is required early on.
Sometimes the AAC Contracting Directorate gets involved.
3.14. Test Acceptance (paragraph 13 2.6). The test acceptance worksheet in TPT informs
management of the scope of possible testing and what organization is recommended to conduct
the test. The 46 OG and 46 RANG will review test acceptance worksheets and formally accept
the work prior to creation of the Statement of Capability.
20 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
3.15. Statement of Capability (SOC) (paragraph 13 2.9). The SOC is an agreement between
the 46 TW and the customer regarding the test to be conducted. It specifies estimated schedule,
costs, responsibilities, and risks. This document formally requests required funding from the
customer to conduct the test.
3.16. Baselining the Test (paragraphs 4. 3.2 and 4.4.2). After an estimate has been created
using EVCAS and after the customer has returned a signed copy of the SOC, the PE will
establish the Work Breakdown Structures (WBS) and baseline the test, which will produce the
PMB on the EVA chart. Re-baselines may be required if the scope, cost, or schedule of the test
changes but only after formal approval at the group commander level.
3.17. Funding (paragraph 8 2.4). The customer must send funds for test execution to begin.
These funds are usually in the form of a Project Order (PO), MIPR, or check. Request the
customer put the JON on all funding documents. These documents should be turned into your 46
TW financial representative for processing into the Job Order Cost Accounting System
(JOCAS).
3.18. Test Suspension or Termination (paragraph 13 2.15). Test suspension or termination is
accomplished by the PE at any time in the test process. Termination means all 46 TW test
activity is completed and can be taken out of the system. Test suspension is the removal of the
test from the active phase for long delays between test missions due to planned delays,
malfunctions, change of scope, etc.
3.19. Flight Clearances (paragraph 13 2.12). A flight clearance is a document qualifying an
aircraft configuration safe for flight within stated flight limits. For all non-certified combinations
of external stores, new stores, or nonstandard fuse or lanyard routings, a flight clearance is
required to conduct flight testing on AFMC aircraft. These clearances are intended for flight test
missions only and are generated by the 46 TW Seek Eagle Office. Normally, the test engineer is
responsible for obtaining the flight clearance.
3.20. Appendices (Chapters 6, 10, and 11). Appendices are documents that support the TD.
These include the MOT, Logistics Support, Safety, Flight Clearance, and Technical Support
appendices. At the kickoff meeting the test team will outline the general requirements for the
test and what support appendices will be required. Once the scope of the test is finalized, the TE
will draft the MOT. The PE then forwards the approved MOT to the appropriate support
agencies and requests the applicable support appendices.
3.21. Radio Frequency Authorization (RFA) (Chapter 12). If a test includes frequencies
outside the normal aircraft or range resource frequencies, an RFA is required to use those
frequencies. An example could be telemetry TM frequencies for weapons.
3.22. Technical Review Board (TRB). The TRB is responsible for conducting the technical
and safety review. During this meeting, the technical details of the test are discussed with
subject matter experts and all issues are resolved so the Method of Test (MOT) or concept of
operations can be finalized. In many cases, a formal Technical Review Board (TRB) will be
required. The TRB is a review by independent, experienced subject matter experts to ensure the
test methodology, data collections and data analysis plan will effectively meet the stated test
objectives.
3.23. Risk Management Board (RMB) (paragraph 10 2.5). The RMB is a mandatory
meeting with Safety to determine if there are any hazardous procedures or conditions during the
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 21
test. The Safety Appendix and the Test Hazard Analysis Worksheets (THAW) are products of
this meeting. The RMB meeting usually occurs after the MOT is finalized and is scheduled by
the TE with the Safety Office. For major ground test facilities, coordination with safety is
initiated through a Livelink workflow and an RMB may not be required.
3.24. Test Directive (TD) (paragraph 13 2.13). The TD is the authorization to commit funds
and resources to execute the test. The TD includes the test plan, flight clearances (if required),
and appropriate appendices, and is approved when signed. The TD must be ready for publication
prior to the Airborne Test Review/Safety Board (ATR/SB) see below. The date the TD is signed
becomes the official start date of the active test phase. Using the Test Process Tool, the PE
documents activation of the JON. This is required before any test execution.
3.25. Airborne Test Review/Safety Board (ATR/SB) (paragraph 10 2.6). The ATR/SB is a
technical and safety review by 46 OG/ CC. This meeting is required if the test is conducted at
Eglin AFB Ranges, using 46 TW-owned aircraft, flown by AAC-assigned aircrews, or when
ATR/SB review is otherwise requested. In general, any flight test executed under a 46 TW TD
will probably require an ATR/SB. Refer to AACI 91-201, AAC Test Safety Review Process
(see Useful Links menu option in the Test Process Tool for link), for further information on the
ATR/SB. The TE schedules the ATR/SB with the 46 OG ATR/SB project officer.
3.26. EVA (paragraph 4 4.2). EVA is a metric to track schedule and costs using cost and
schedule indices and variances. It is a product of baselining your estimate in EVCAS.
3.27. Test Oversight (paragraphs 4.
4.2. and 13. 2). This is the PE‘s involvement during the test conduct phase--continuous
monitoring, with emphasis on financing and scheduling, of the test through the TE. It may
require reports to management and may include preparation for briefings.
3.28. Test Reporting. The test report is the final product of the 46 TW T&E process. Reports
can be in the form of Quick Look Reports (QLR), Technical Reports (TR), Letter Reports (LR),
or Data Packages (DP). Refer to the 46 TW Author‘s Guide for Preparing Test and Evaluation
Technical Reports, Aug 1998 (see Useful Links menu option in the Test Process Tool for link).
3.28.1. AFMC Instruction 99-103, 46TW Supplement 1, Release of Test Information. This
AFMC Instruction supplement outlines policy, assigns responsibilities for the completion of
46 TW T&E reports, and assigns responsibilities for the proper handling of 46 TW Scientific
and Technical Information (STINFO). It establishes guidelines to assist authors in preparing
accurate and clearly written T&E reports and proper dissemination of STINFO to the
Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC). It also establishes 46 OSS/ OSXR, 882-
2211, as the STINFO office for the 46 TW.
3.28.2. Technical Reports Office. 46 OSS/OSXR is the 46 TW focal point for STINFO
documents and the primary point of contact (POC) for all administrative matters pertaining to
the test report process. From assignment of report numbers through completion of the final
copy, the personnel in this office will answer questions and provide the latest guidance on
preparation of the test report.
3.29. Closeout (paragraph 13
22 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
2.15. 4). The closeout is the final phase prior to the test going off the books. All work must be
stopped, funds must be zeroed out, and all data being held for the test must be destroyed or
archived. The PE should submit a closeout letter to all stakeholders.
3.30. Exceptions to the Normal Process. For many tests conducted at Eglin, the program‘s
Program Executive Officer has designated the 46 TW as the responsible test organization (RTO).
This means we develop the MOT to satisfy the customer‘s test objectives, conduct the test,
analyze the data, and provide a report of the results. There are exceptions to this normal process
where the 46 TW may provide only limited services. In some cases the test customer may act as
RTO and Eglin acts as a participating test organization (PTO). PTO responsibilities can include:
providing range resources, collection and/or analysis of data, or other limited functions defined
by the customer. Typical of tests in this category are tests conducted by other Eglin-based
organizations such as the 53d Wing, and AFOTEC. Whatever the RTO/PTO arrangements, the
functions of the PE for planning are essentially the same.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 23
Chapter 4
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
4.1. Introduction. Major Range and Test Facility Bases (MRTFBs) are national assets and are
governed by law to provide the necessary test support to its customers (see DoD 7000.14R,
Volume 11A). In supporting the customers, the 46 TW organizations must be able to provide the
necessary cost/schedule estimates/milestones to its customers to achieve their testing needs. Pre-
statement of capability (pre-SOC) direct costs may be reimbursed. Costs for management and
technical consulting, however, will be funded institutionally. Test centers should carefully
evaluate support provided to differentiate reimbursable pre-SOC from non-reimbursable
consulting costs. Users must be informed in advance when pre-SOC costs will require
reimbursement. Test center commander/civilian directors are encouraged to make judicious use
of the $5,000 waiver authority. Rough estimates needed by users for planning purposes should
be limited. Development of rough estimates should be funded institutionally by the test
organization. See AFMCI 65-602, Uniform Reimbursement and Pricing Procedures, for
additional details.
4.1.1. Preparing Required Documents. Use a Program Introduction Document (PID),
Program Requirements Document (PRD), SOC, Memorandum of Agreement (MOA),
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), or DD Form 1144, Support Agreement, whichever
is proper. The PID or PRD introduces a program, mission, or test to the T&E activity. The
PID or PRD must include enough information to permit the T&E activity to evaluate its
ability to provide the required support and provide estimates of reimbursable cost and
schedule of performance. Although the initial PID or PRD must be made early enough to
permit an alignment of funds between the customer program or project managers and the
T&E activities, this will not preclude further refinement and definition of the test
requirements before a reimbursable order is issued and work begins. In response to the PID
or PRD, the T&E activity will prepare a SOC that describes the T&E activity's ability to
provide the T&E support. The amount of detail required may vary but, as a minimum, the
SOC must inform the program or project manager of the T&E activity's ability to provide the
required support, tentative schedule of accomplishment, estimate of the cost by fiscal year,
and should state the effort will be completed on an actual cost basis.
4.2. Work Breakdown Structure (WBS). The 46 TW uses the Capability Analysis and Risk
Assessment (CARA) WBS to organize test programs by capabilities. In general, a WBS serves
many purposes and facilitates planning by providing a formal structure for identifying the work.
Most importantly, the WBS provides a link between technical achievement and the cost/schedule
information (i.e., SOC) being provided to the customer throughout the program life cycle.
4.2.1. The CARA WBS is a test planning tool that organizes all test tasks into a capabilities-
specific set of work packages, each of which is defined with a four-character WBS code
dependent upon the type of task and capabilities used for that work package. The 46 TW
CARA WBS codes are comprised of the following level definitions:
24 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Table 4.1. WBS Level Definitions
Level 1 Most basic division or phase of a test program, i.e.,
P = plan/provision,
C = conduct,
A = analyze,
R = report,
Q = $$ sent off-site, and
O = other.
This level is standardized by AFMC.
Level 2 Identifies the Capability Code for activities occurring within each Level
1 phase. Capability Codes are standardized at the Test Wing level.
Level 3 Identifies specific types of activities occurring within each Level 2
activity. This level is specified by the PE.
Level 4 These are work packages within the specific Level 3 activity. This level
is established by the PE and TE for each specific test program.
4.2.1.1.5. A WBS can be indentured or pictorial. An indentured WBS is merely a list
identifying each work package in an indentured format. The list of work packages
seen in Figure 4.1 is representative of an indentured WBS. A pictorial WBS is
merely the work packages represented as a family tree. Similar to that of an
organization structure, the pictorial WBS is used to easily identify interrelationships
between work packages within the program effort. An example of a pictorial WBS is
seen in Figure 4.2.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 25
Figure 4.1. Indentured Work Breakdown Structure
Figure 4.2. Pictorial Work Breakdown Structure
4.2.1.2. A complete list of the standardized 46 TW CARA WBS codes can be found on-
line in EVCAS. The specific capability codes that apply to each unit are provided by the
test organization‘s Resource Advisor (RA). Now that you have defined your work
packages and organized your test program using WBS, you are ready to plan your
schedule and budget estimates.
26 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
4.3. Cost/Schedule Estimates. One of the most important responsibilities of a PE is the
estimation of costs required to accomplish a test program using the current standard Rate Price
Catalog provided by the 46 TW Cost Accounting Office (46 TW/FMP). These estimates must be
as realistic as possible to avoid program delays and strained customer relations. At times it
might be necessary to fine-tune the estimates by identifying specific contract labor costs and
reflecting these in the SOC. The final estimate is used in the SOC to request funds from the
customer and to determine the Performance Measurement Baseline (PMB). The PMB is the cost
and schedule plan for a program and is used to track performance (see Section 4.4., Cost
Tracking/Program Management). (Note: Rates for any Element of Expense Investment Code
[EEIC] or product service code may be updated to reflect current costs at any time.
4.3.1. The cost/schedule estimate is built using EVCAS.
4.3.2. To account for your planning expenses, planning work packages must be identified
first and then baselined in EVCAS. Once all requirements have been determined, the PMB
can be defined and WBSs added to the original planning baseline using the following
procedures:
4.3.2.1. The first step in building the PMB is scheduling the work. This is a crucial step
in establishing a meaningful PMB since the schedules form the basis of the time-phased
budgets. Each program schedule is based on the work packages you have defined by
your WBS selection. These WBS codes are entered into EVCAS with a start date and
end date required to complete each task, the number of events, and a work package title.
The duration is automatically calculated.
4.3.2.2. The second step in building the PMB is to budget the work. For each package,
the PE identifies in EVCAS the resources and manpower required (by hours or dollar
amount) to complete the activity. EVCAS accesses the current standard Rate Price
Catalog, and the dollar amount for each activity is determined. Built into EVCAS is an
inflation factor percentage over which the PE has control. This inflation factor comes
into play when the PMB has activity in outyears. Note: Templates can be developed in
EVCAS by each PE or PE office for use in building future estimates. Each template is a
standard set of resources required to accomplish a specific type of mission or task. The
identified resources and associated hour or dollar amounts should be based on previously
conducted missions or tasks and actual charges collected. Each PE can copy these
templates into their estimates and use them as an accurate foundation, making changes or
―fine-tuning‖ to meet specific requirements.
4.3.2.3. Once your estimate is complete, you can view/print the reports you will need to
prepare your SOC (see paragraph 13.2.9. for instructions on preparing the SOC). The
SOC is, in effect, the program baseline. Once signed by the 46 TW and the customer, the
SOC indicates a mutual agreement for the PMB. If significant changes to the program
occur, i.e., the customer or the 46 TW initiates an action that causes a change in scope,
the baseline must be amended and a revised SOC issued. Once signed, the program is re-
baselined, forming a new PMB. Full funding for the fiscal year is required except during
a continuing resolution authority (CRA) period when incremental funding is permitted.
Once the CRA is resolved, the full remainder amount should be received.
4.3.2.4. The program manager must ensure funds are provided only for the specific work
detailed in the current SOC. Any funding that is sent that is not for a project starting in
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 27
the current fiscal year or shortly thereafter (3 months) should be refused (Ref DoD FMR
7000.14-R, Vol 11A). Promptly notify managers of programs and projects that are
subject to rescheduling because of acceptance of higher priority effort. If work has not
started on an accepted reimbursable order and the T&E activity cannot provide the
required T&E support as scheduled for any valid reason not attributable to the program or
project office, the user will be notified and given an opportunity to withdraw or amend
the reimbursable order. Initiate action to amend reimbursable orders with the ordering
program or project office when cost of performance or schedule slippage indicates need
to decrease or increase the ceiling amount or extend the performance period. Normally,
take action before cost of performance exceeds 75 percent of the current ceiling amount
(DFAS-DE 7070.2 provides guidance on reimbursable orders). Also, review each
reimbursable order citing expiring year funds no later than 90 days prior to end of the
fiscal year, and notify the ordering activity in writing if a funding adjustment is required
prior to funds expiration. If work financed from an expiring appropriation does not begin
before 1 January of the following calendar year, the funding shall be returned to the
customer for cancellation unless it is unavoidable and could not be foreseen at the time of
funding acceptance. Documentation shall be retained by the program manager for audit
review. In all cases, the bona fide need rule for a specific fiscal year must be met.
4.3.2.5. Customer funds must be received prior to initiating work. Except in an
emergency, DoD customers only, reimbursable work should not be started before an
order is known to exist and reimbursable work should not continue against an existing
order when there is a lack of customer funds. A telephone call or e-mail to the
performing activity with the customer number, date funded amount, and name of
authorizing official is acceptable. In an emergency, the performing activity commander
or at the commander‘s designation, the comptroller or comparable official may approve
starting work in the absence of an order or continuing work in excess of customer funds
by completing a deferral letter which contains JON and justification of why customer
funding has not been received, test has exceeded customer funding, when funding is
expected and the estimated dollar amount. Once signed by the commander or designee,
the letter should be submitted to the applicable group budget office and 46 TW/FMP (Ref
AFMCI 65-602, 2.1.1 and AFMCI 65-603, 1.18). No work will be started for Foreign
Military Sales or Commercial customers without funds provided.
4.4. Cost Tracking/Program Management. During each test, the PE and TE are responsible
for validating charges, identifying questionable charges, researching and correcting questionable
charges, and tracking test progress against the PMB. To accomplish these tasks, a variety of
reports and analysis techniques can be used.
4.4.1. Validating/Investigating Charges. The JOCAS II, which collects and maintains the
job order cost accounting database, provides users with the capability of generating standard,
preformatted reports or creating their own custom-designed reports. 46 TW/FMP has also
created some useful preformatted reports which use JOCAS II accounting data and reside at
the JOCAS website (see Useful Links menu option in the Test Process Tool for link). JOCAS
II tracks costs and cost summaries back to their original points of input to maintain a
complete audit trail of all cost accounting data. These capabilities allow the PE and TE to
perform many of their program management responsibilities. Following are some of the
available reports that reside in the JOCAS II database.
28 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
4.4.1.1. Job Order Status Report (JOSR). The JOCAS office performs periodic
consolidation (usually the 5th
workday after the end of each period) in which all charges
are consolidated by program for the previous period. 46 TW/FMP creates a monthly
JOSR report that rolls up each program‘s monthly and cumulative charges by
Responsibility Center/Cost Center (RC/CC) and EEIC. This report contains data
retrieved from several databases, including JOCAS II, General Accounting and Finance
System (GAFS), Standard Base Supply System (SBSS), and the Civil Engineering
Workload Information Management System (WIMS). The data retrieved from these
databases is used in the JOSR to list all funding received, expenses to date, supply due-
outs, commitments and obligations, and billing information for a program. The report
uses all of this information to provide a bottom line summary, by fiscal year, for each
program. The JOSR is a valuable tool which allows the PE to quickly validate charges
and identify questionable charges. The focal point is 46 TW/FMP, (850) 882-2531.
4.4.1.2. Other 46 TW/FMP-Generated Cost Tracking Reports. These are additional
custom-designed reports to aid the PE in researching questionable charges and providing
a means of checking current charges in JOCAS without waiting for the JOSR.
Instructions for executing, viewing, and printing the following reports can be found at the
JOCAS website (see Useful Links menu option in the Test Process Tool for link). The
focal point is 46 TW/FMP, (850) 882-2531.
4.4.1.2.1. Manage JON List. This report gives managers a quick summary of JON
total costs. The user can retrieve data for a single JON or for several JONs by date
span or as a cumulative total to date. The report lists JON funding documents, their
value, and amount billed to date.
4.4.1.2.2. Monthly Detail Expenses. This report provides a detailed breakout of costs
by specific cost area and provides a means to investigate possible charge
discrepancies that were identified using the Manage JON List Reports. Users can
review charges in cost areas by office symbol, product service (PS)/EEIC and dollars
expended. Data can be retrieved for a single JON by date span.
4.4.1.2.3. Reimbursable Costs Expenses. The report gives managers a quick
summary of JON total costs with a detailed explanation of RC/CC and EEIC codes.
The report lists JON expenses billed to date.
4.4.1.2.4. Labor history – Approved Labor Cost Cumulative. This report provides
detailed listings of civil service and military man-hour charges. Managers can use
these reports to investigate possible charge discrepancies by individual. Man-hour
costs are listed by charge date, mission number, WBS, RC/CC, office symbol,
worker‘s name, hours, and dollars expended.
4.4.1.3. Detailed Cost Information. This TWES report will provide a detailed breakout
of costs either by JON, mission number, or WBS. This allows investigation of possible
charge discrepancies and the building of a cost per mission type/WBS database. Mission
costs can be reviewed by office symbol, PS/EEIC, and dollars expended.
4.4.1.4. Fault Billing Procedures. In addition to using the above reports to validate
actual charges, the PE must also validate that the correct fault billing procedures have
been followed. Scheduled resources can be charged to the test program whether or not
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 29
they were actually used. A fault billing procedure determines who pays for the test
resources. Based on the information provided on the post mission report (PMR), the 46
TW Information Technology Division (46 TW/XPI) will make a determination of who is
responsible for the mission charges and assign a fault code to the PMR. For more
information refer to the 46th TW Instruction 33-104, Fault Billing Procedures.
4.4.1.5. Effective 1 October 2005 (FY 2006), and in accordance with Section 232 of the
FY 2003 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the institutional and overhead
costs of facilities or resources within Major Range and Test Facility Base (MRTFB)
program areas are to be funded through the major test and evaluation type/related budget
accounts. Charges to DoD customers for these facilities or resources will be only the
direct costs readily identifiable to, and consumed by, the use of the facility or resource for
testing under a particular program. Institutionally funded (appropriated) and overhead
(indirect) costs will not be charged to DoD component users, and will remain as costs
fully borne by the institutionally funded program element accounts comprising the
MRTFB structure. Institutional and overhead costs are defined as the jointly or
commonly used costs of maintaining, operating, upgrading, and modernizing the facility
or resource. Overhead (indirect) costs will not include any incremental cost directly
attributable to the use of the facility or resource for testing under a particular program.
4.4.1.6. Examples of chargeable direct costs include: labor, material, facilities, minor
construction, utilities, equipment, supplies, items damaged or consumed during testing,
specific calibration of instrumentation when part of a range operation supporting a
specific customer, maintenance, and operational costs directly attributable to a specific
program.
4.4.1.7. Examples of indirect costs include: time-based preventative maintenance and
maintenance due to usage, the costs of leases except when the cost of said lease can be
directly associated with a specific customer, building a capability not directly identifiable
to a specific customer, general calibration of instrumentation, maintenance and repair of
shop machinery, replacement of obsolete components, and purchase of spares. For non-
DoD users see AFMCI 65-602 and DoD 7000.14R, Volume 11A.
4.4.2. Tracking Test Progress. The 46 TW uses earned value techniques to track test
progress, to project overall costs, and to identify potential shortfalls and cost overruns before
they occur. Performance indicators and terms used are as follows:
4.4.2.1. Budgeted Cost of Work Scheduled (BCWS) - The sum of all budgets for all
work scheduled to be accomplished within a given time period. This is also called the
PMB.
4.4.2.2. Budgeted Cost of Work Performed (BCWP) - The sum of the budgets for WBS
codes and completed portions of open WBS codes. This is also known as Earned Value.
4.4.2.3. Actual Cost of Work Performed (ACWP) - The cost actually incurred and
recorded in
accomplishing the work performed within a given time period.
4.4.2.4. Budget at Completion (BAC) - The endpoint of the PMB or total budget
allocated to any individual program, i.e., the SOC estimate.
30 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
4.4.2.5. Estimate at Completion (EAC) - Actual costs plus the estimate of cost for work
remaining. The EAC is calculated by assessing past BCWS, BCWP, and ACWP. As this
projection is based on past data, it is most reliable after 50 percent of test missions have
been completed.
4.4.2.5.1. EAC = ACWPcum + [(BAC - BCWP) / (0.8*CPI + 0.2*SPI)]
4.4.2.6. PMBEST BAC - The PE‘s best estimate/judgment of final end-of-program costs.
4.4.2.7. Schedule Performance Index (SPI) - A measure of schedule efficiency
comparing the value of work achieved to the value of the work scheduled. SPI =
BCWP/BCWS
4.4.2.8. Cost Performance Index (CPI) - A measure of cost efficiency comparing the
value of work achieved for a dollar of cost. CPI = BCWP/ACWP
4.4.2.9. When the PE baselines the program estimate in EVCAS, the WBS codes
associated with that program are sent to JOCAS and Center Scheduling Enterprise (CSE)
(the on-line range and resource scheduling system used by the 46 TW). Missions that are
scheduled through CSE must contain a WBS code. Missions are conducted and each
work center then submits their respective mission or non-mission related charges by
program and WBS code into JOCAS. This link between EVCAS, CSE and JOCAS
allows automation of earned value for each baselined program.
4.4.2.10. 46 TW/FMP emails a Customer‘s Funds Summary to the customer. The
information contained in this summary is similar to that of the JOSR, differing only by
funds expended.
4.5. T&E Facilities Funded by One or More DoD Customers. In accordance with DoD
FMR, Volume 11A, Chapter 12, paragraph 120203.B.1.a, sub paragraph 1, by mutual agreement,
investments in new or existing T&E facilities may be funded, in whole or in part, by one or more
DoD customers of an MRTFB activity. Although more than one customer may receive the
benefit of the facility, a single customer can provide the entire amount of funding should they so
choose. Moreover, if more than one customer wants to provide the entire amount of funding, the
amount of funding does not have to be the same in between the two (or more) customers.
(Example: Two programs agree to fund a T&E facility for the 46 TW for a total cost of $1M.
One program can fund $750K of the cost and the other can fund $250K of the cost (for a total of
$1M)). If one or more customers want to fund the cost of a facility, a memorandum of
agreement must be completed and signed by 46 TW/CC. The agreement must contain, but is not
limited to, the facility name, customer(s) name, description of facility and exactly what is being
funded, the amounts being funded by customer(s), and a point of contact. Contact your group
budget office for a copy of the agreement or contact 46 TW/FMP, 882-6768.
4.6. Training Customers. Training customers are to be charged in relation to their activity.
(Example: HQ AFSOC is training on the range; however, AFSOC is a DoD customer and will
be charged as such.) Contact 46 TW/FMP, 882-6768, with questions.
4.7. Pass Through Using a DoD Organization. When a customer receives funding from an
FMS or Commercial customer and in turn sends that funding to the 46 TW, the customer will be
charged the FMS or Commercial rates. Contact 46 TW/FMP, 882-6768, with questions.
4.8. Glossary of Financial Terms and Procedures:
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 31
4.8. 1 Accounting Classifications. The accounting and reporting fund codes are the long set of
numbers seen on the PO. If you have a question about a particular accounting classification,
contact your financial specialist. The following is a typical accounting classification for the
Research, Development Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) appropriation (5753600 295 4721
696997 7M4600 597 000000 503000 F03000 JON xxxxxxxx).
Table 4.2. Accounting Classification Breakdown
57 Department
5 Fiscal year
3600 Appropriation symbol
295 Fund code and fiscal year
4721 Operating agency code and allotment serial number
696997 Budget program account code
7M4600 Cost center or material program code
597 Element of expense or material program code
000000 Program element code
503000 Accounting and disbursing station number
F03000 Accounting Station DoDAAD
JON xxxxxxxx Project Job Order Number.
4.8.2. The first two digits identify the federal agency or department:
Table 4.3. Federal Agency or Department Codes
57 Air Force
17 Navy
21 Army
97 OSD.
4.8.3. The third digit is the last digit of the fiscal year. The last four digits identify the
appropriation account and the treasury fund financing the appropriation. This is sometimes
referred to as the ―color of money.‖ Each type of appropriation has an expiration period.
32 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Table 4.4. Appropriation Types
3600 These appropriations are used for RDT&E of new systems and have an obligation
period of 2 years.
3010 These appropriations are used to procure items and have an obligation 3020,
period of 3 years. 3010 appropriations are for aircraft, 3020 for missiles, 3080
and 3080 for everything else.
3300 These appropriations are used for military construction and have an obligation
period of 5 years.
3400 These appropriations are for Operations and Maintenance (O&M) and have an
obligation period of 1 year.
3500 These appropriations are used to pay for military personnel and have an
obligation period of 1 year.
Table 4.5. Fund Types
FT Fund Type:
"A" Approp. 3600 (RDT&E), Support Funds (Direct Reporting C, D, E)
"C" Approp. 3600 (RDT&E), Mission Funds (Direct Reporting C, D, E)
"J" Approp. 3600 (RDT&E), 3010, 3011, 3020, 3080 Reimbursement Records
"L" Approp. 3400 (O&M), (Direct Reporting C, D, E)
"M" Approp. 3400 (O&M), Reimbursement Records
4.9. Antideficiency Act (ADA). Title 31, US Code, Sections 1341 and 1517, are the most
important statutes affecting the obligation of funds. In general the ADA outlines that,
Government officials may not make payments or commit the United States to make payments at
some future time for goods or services, unless there is enough money in the "bank" to cover the
cost in full. The "bank," in our case, is money in a JON, or in the case of DoD programs, the
verification by the Program Manager that funds have been appropriated, and will be transferred
to the appropriate JON in a reasonable amount of time. For FMS and Commercial programs,
however, money must be in the JON before any work begins. The specific principle provisions
are as follows: prohibits any officer or employee from making or authorizing an obligation in
excess of the amount available in an appropriation or in excess of the amount permitted by
agency regulations; forbids the government from obligating funds in advance of appropriations
unless authorized by a law; and requires the head of each agency to issue regulations establishing
an administrative control system with a dual purpose. First, to keep obligations within the
amount apportioned or allocated and second, to engage the agency to fix responsibility for
making obligations in excess of the amounts appropriated or allocated.
4.9.1. Contract Ratification. The term ―ratification‖ means the act of approving an
unauthorized commitment by an official who has authority to do so. At 46 TW, this
authority resides with the Commander. The ratification process normally takes place when a
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 33
government employee contracts with a private entity to secure goods or services without the
proper authority. Whenever acquiring goods and services from private entities (to include
NAF activities such as the Aero Club), every effort should be made to ensure proper
contracting channels are used. Contact your financial representative or the base contracting
office (AAC/PK) if you have questions.
4.9.2. Deferral. A deferral is the consequence of actions that result in an over-commitment,
over-obligation, or over-expenditure of funds available for the testing effort at hand. This
shows as a negative balance on the JOSR. This means that 46 TW direct budget authority
has been used for a customer requirement and we have not been repaid. Deferrals should be
avoided at all costs as they reduce our ability to fund TW requirements.
4.9.2.1. Deferral Management. Great effort should be exerted to collect funds from
customers for the total test cost billed to their JON. Once a JON is in deferral, a MORD
will be accomplished at the squadron or group level and kept for the next 90 days to
cover the amount of the deferral. On a monthly basis, 46 TW/FMP will send or post a list
to each group budget office to highlight JONs that are in deferral. After 90 days of the
JON being in deferral, the group or squadron‘s direct budget authority will be used to
cover the deferral. If customer funding is received, the squadron or group will have their
direct budget authority returned to execute 46 TW requirements. Additional guidance
may be found in Chapter 13 of this guide, paragraph 13.2.14.
4.9.2.2. Deferral Management Review Process. Deferrals are reported to each group
commander/technical director each month. In addition, 46 TW/CC will be briefed on
deferral amounts, by group, at the monthly 46 TW/CC staff meetings.
4.9.2.3. PE Deferral Management Procedures. A deferral report has been developed and
is available at the JOCAS website in order to provide support to resource advisors and
program engineers/test engineers on what JONs are in deferral. Group budget offices
receive this report on a monthly basis and provide support to resource advisors and PEs
with current year and prior year funding/deferrals using JOSR and JOCAS reports as
required. This will assist PEs in identifying funding errors and deferrals by fiscal year,
and will help manage program deferrals on a more regular basis.
4.9.2.3.1. Group budget offices, with assistance from squadron resource advisors
(RA), will track the status of deferrals and maintain copies of the deferral letters. All
current year deferrals that still remain after the actions above are taken will require
individual PEs and squadron RAs to develop a get-well plan to clear deferrals. Get-
well plans should consist of the following sequence:
4.9.2.3.1.1. Has the PE contacted the person (or requesting office) that sent the
test request?
4.9.2.3.1.2. If yes with no results, has the PE contacted the requesting office‘s
PM or FM product head? (Note: Coordinate with the senior leadership before
proceeding to the next step. A letter from the squadron commander could be used
as the next step.)
4.9.2.3.1.3. If yes with no results, has the PE attempted to remedy deferrals with
the functional FM lead (at Wing or equivalent level) of the requesting office?
34 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
4.9.2.3.1.4. If yes with no results, has the PE prepared a general officer level staff
summary sheet to request deferral relief (payment) from appropriate PEO,
MAJCOM, or other equivalent general officer level? (Note: this will be the first
involvement by the group commander and 46 TW/CC.)
4.9.2.3.1.5. If none of the above result in additional funding to cover the deferral,
the squadron or group direct budget authority will be used to cover the deferral.
4.9.2.3.1.6. For expired year deferrals, a deferral write-off can occur but must be
approved by 46 TW/FMP and 46 TW/FM.
4.10. Direct Cost. A direct cost is any item of cost incurred by a cost center that can be readily
and specifically identified to any final cost objective, product service, or JON. Direct costs
include, but are not limited to, labor and related benefits, material, travel and per diem,
transportation, dedicated equipment, and contractual services. See AFMCI 65-602 for further
definition/clarification.
4.11. Indirect Cost. An indirect cost is any item of cost that is incurred by a direct mission
element for joint objectives and therefore cannot be identified specifically with a single final cost
objective, product service, or JON. Indirect costs may be incurred by a direct and indirect cost
center. Management support and military personnel are considered indirect costs. See AFMCI
65-602 for further definition/clarification.
4.12. Acceleration of Labor Rates. When full reimbursement is appropriate in transactions
with non-federal activities, the labor rates must be increased by applying acceleration factors or
accrual rates to the composite rate to recover a portion of the costs of military and civilian
personnel benefits not included in the regular rates. These factors provide for the reimbursement
of retirement, military leave, holiday, and certain other personnel costs of military labor and
retirement and other benefits for civilian labor. The Reimbursable Code Matrix for the current
fiscal year can be found at the JOCAS website (see Useful Links menu option in the Test Process
Tool for link) under Miscellaneous Reports.
4.13. Fiscal Year. For the US Government, this is from October 1st to September 30th.
4.14. Funds Status. There are several stages of accountability of funds in the execution phase,
i.e., commitment, obligation, and expenditure.
4.14.1. Commitment. An accounting procedure whereby funds are administratively reserved
for something to be bought in the near future. This procedure precedes obligation actions
and is normally based on firm directives, orders, or requests.
4.14.2. Obligation. Obligates the government to make a future payment of the actual cost of
services or articles ordered by a signed contract. The obligation is carried in official
accounting records and legally sets aside a specified sum of funds to be expended through
completion of the contract.
4.14.3. Expenditure. Actual payment for services or goods received.
4.15. Commencement of Work. The work to be performed under a funding document is
expected to begin within a reasonable time after its acceptance by the performing DoD owned
establishment (reference DoD FMR Volume 11A, Chapter. 2, 020510).
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 35
4.15.1. Although work on a funding document is not required to commence in the year of
funding acceptance, as a minimum requirement, evidence shall exist at the time of funds
acceptance showing the intention that work (or procurement if required prior to the beginning
of work) is to (1) begin without delay (usually within 90 days), and (2) be completed within
the normal production period for the specific work ordered.
4.15.2. If work (or procurement if required prior to the beginning of work) financed from an
appropriation that expired for obligation on September 30 on a project order does not begin,
or is not expected to begin, before January 1 of the following calendar year, then the funding
document should be returned by the performing activity for cancellation. If it is documented
that the delay is unavoidable, and could not have been foreseen at the time of funding
document acceptance, and that documentation is retained for audit review, then the funds can
be retained and executed.
4.16. Excess Funds Balance Management. Every effort should be made by the PE to clean up
excess fund balances remaining on completed test projects. These balances should be identified
to the customers for withdrawal when the test has been in close-out status for a reasonable time
to clear any outstanding charges. Additional guidance may be found in Chapter 13, paragraph
13.2.14, of this guide. Contact your financial representative if you need assistance clearing
excess funds balances.
4.17. Job Order Cost Accounting System. JOCAS is an expense, commitment & obligation
accumulation system designed to identify total resources expended in the completion of a job
order by type of EEIC, by performing organization RC/CC, and by source of financing (fund
code).
4.18. Common Funding Documents:
4.18.1. DD Form 448, Military Inter-Departmental Purchase Request (MIPR). A MIPR is a
requisition from one military department to another for services, supplies, or equipment. For
Air Force guidance and procedures for purchases using MIPRs, DD Form 448, and
Acceptance of MIPRs, DD Form 448-2, please refer to AFI 65-116, Air Force Purchases
Using Military Interdepartmental Purchase Requests (MIPRS).
4.18.2. AF Form 185, Project Order (PO). A PO is a requisition from one Air Force
department to another for services, supplies, or equipment. POs contain completion dates
(Item 10, AF Form 185, PO), which are not the fund expiration date but the date when all
necessary actions will have been accomplished by the performing activity. This date may be,
and frequently is, later than the expiration date. The performing activity must not incur
charges to be billed against the PO after this date without the approval of the ordering
activity. Any unspent funds left on the document at the end of the fiscal year can be coded as
the new fiscal year if the Period of Performance (POP) is extended into the new fiscal year;
the document is referred to as an Unfilled Order (UFO). For further clarification see AFMCI
65-603, Appropriation Reimbursement Procedures. Extensions of PO completion dates must
be documented by formal amendments. Refer to DoD-7000.14-R, Volume 4, DoD Financial
Management Regulation, Accounting Policy and Procedures.
4.18.3. AFMC Form 277, Reimbursable Order/Request (REO). A REO is a requisition form
used on Eglin for the purchase of supplies, services, and equipment, and, with customer
concurrence, to transfer funds between JONs.
36 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
4.18.4. Work Phase Code. The following work phase codes in JOCAS are locally assigned
and are used to designate the status of a JON:
Table 4.6. Work Phase Code Definitions
P Planning phase - Begins upon approval of the implementation documentation and
ends upon completion of the testing/task activity. During this phase, expenditure of
resources as outlined in the implementation documentation is authorized
A Active phase – This phase authorizes scheduling missions and is entered once the
associated TD is signed (or SOC for JPRIMES, GWEF, or Climatic Lab).
S Suspense - Normally the effort will not be placed in suspense unless a delay of
greater than 30 days is anticipated. Preferable to place JON in Y work phase code
since charges may still be applied in S.
R Reporting phase - Active testing is complete and report is in preparation
X Indicates job orders that have been canceled or terminated short of the intended
technical goal and to which no costs may be obligated or assigned.
Y Indicates JONs that have been completed within the scope of the intended
technical goal and new direct costs may be obligated or assigned but have un-
liquidated obligations outstanding
Z Indicates JONs that have been completely closed out with no remaining un-
liquidated obligations. No additional costs will be accepted. JOCAS moves JONS
to the Z stage programmatically if the following conditions have been met:
1) All outstanding funding has been cleared.
2) No Deferrals exist.
3) No Commitments/Obligations pending.
4) Estimated completion date field is updated on JON.
5) JON is in WPC ‗Y‘ in JOCAS
6) 90 Days have passed since steps 1 thru 4 have been completed.
Or 7) If at the beginning of the FY the only funds remaining on the
document are expired
4.18.5. Test Pricing Decision Tree. The diagram in Figure 4.3 should be used by the PE to
ensure the correct pricing policy has been applied when developing estimates for test projects
or researching/validating charges. Contact your financial representative if you have
additional questions on pricing policy. AFMCI 65-602 has a revised matrix (see Figure 4.4)
for reimbursement and takes precedence over any conflict with the decision tree.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 37
Figure 4.3. Test Pricing Decision Tree
4.18.6. The current reimbursement guidance matrix under NDAA as reflected in AFMCI 65-
602 is reflected below, should a conflict exist between the pricing decision tree and the
matrix, the latter takes precedence.
38 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Figure 4.4. Reimbursement Matrix
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 39
Chapter 5
SECURITY
5.1. Introduction. The 46 TW Test Security Office, (96 ABW/IPX) (46 TW/XPS), 882-3580,
is the proponent for the content and instructions in this chapter.
5.2. Security Badges. EAFB Integrated Defense Plan (IDP) (FOUO), Dec 2010, lists those
areas at Eglin AFB designated as restricted or controlled areas requiring a restricted area badge
(RAB). The OPR is 96 SFS/S-5P, 850-882-8950. For initial issue of an RAB, AF Form 2586,
Unescorted Entry Authorization Certificate, must be completed and signed by the requesting
official who is usually the security manager. The security manager will forward the signed form
to the coordinating/approval official of the area to which access is being requested. Upon
approval, the form is returned to the personnel requiring access and taken to the East or West
Gate Visitor Center (850-882-9903), Pass and Registration Section, to receive the RAB. When
tests require access to the flightline, refer to EAFB IDP, Tab G to App 2 to Annex C for
appropriate coordination/entry approving officials.
5.2.1. Additional information pertaining to coordinating/approval officials can be obtained
by contacting 96 SFS/S-5B (850-882-9903), Pass and Registration Section.
5.2.2. When security badges are required for contractor personnel, the AF Form 2586 must
be coordinated with the PE and signed by the Unit Security Manager. This is in addition to
previously mentioned coordination.
5.2.3. When personnel not assigned to Eglin are participating in testing, their badges must be
turned in prior to departure from the area. The PE or other designated personnel must ensure
badges are returned the unit security manager. The unit security manager takes the badges to
Pass and Registration for turn-in.
5.2.4. The PE must obtain the names and badge numbers of TDY personnel possessing AF
Form 1199cd, USAF Restricted Area Badge, from their home station. A letter requesting
flightline access will be prepared and addressed to 96 SFS/S-5, Building 272, 850-882-5390.
This process will authorize the use of already issued badges. These actions should be
accomplished prior to personnel arriving at Eglin to prevent any delay in access to
accomplish assigned duties.
5.2.5. In order to enhance easy identification, foreign nationals visiting Eglin are required to
wear orange visitor badges on their outer garment while on Eglin AFB. Military foreign
nationals should be in uniform when conducting official business. The 46 TW Foreign
Disclosure Office will coordinate with 96 SFS/S-5B to have foreign visitors badged. For
specific information, contact the 46 TW Foreign Disclosure Officer at 850-882-5356.
5.3. Access Lists/Entry Authority Lists (EAL)/Base Access. Some test areas use Entry
Authority Lists to enforce circulation control and area access. The following procedures are
recommended to ensure the names of test personnel appear on EALs:
5.3.1. Send a visit request to the organization controlling access to the area. The Joint
Personnel Adjudication System (JPAS) is the recommended way to submit a visit request. If
JPAS cannot be utilized a manual visit request must be submitted. The visit request should
40 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
be signed by your organization security manager or other properly designated personnel. The
person signing the visit request is certifying the security clearances of the personnel indicated
on the visit request.
5.3.2. Names can also be added to listings by requesting in letter format on letterhead
stationery indicating name, rank, SSAN, organization, degree of clearance, date of clearance,
purpose of the visit, and the POC within the organization to be visited. See Figure 5.1 for
sample letter.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 41
Figure 5.1. Request for Access/Entry Authority Lists
(LETTERHEAD)
(Date)
MEMORANDUM FOR 46 RANG
ATTN: SECURITY MANAGER
FROM: 46 TS/CCA
SUBJECT: Request for Access JPRIMES Facility
1. Request the following individual from this organization be granted access to the
JPRIMES Facility to support F-15 testing from 15 December 2007 through 15 January
2008:
NAME/RANK SSAN CLEARANCE DATE
Looker, Out B., TSgt 123-45-6789 Top Secret 4 June 2006
2. The POC in your organization for the individual(s) listed above is Capt John D. Doe,
XYZ Org., who can be contacted at 850-882-XXXX.
3. Please contact my office at 850-882-1234 for any questions concerning this event.
Security Manager or
Properly Designated Person
PERSONAL DATA - PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
42 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
5.3.3. Visit requests and listings are normally updated on an annual basis; however, there are
some exceptions to this. Visitor control procedures can vary from organization to
organization. In the event the exact procedures of an organization are not known, contact
with the organization is recommended. Contact unit security manager for additional
guidance.
5.3.4. Base Affidavit Procedures. All visitors (contractors, civilians, or government) who do
not possess a security clearance or Common Access Card (CAC) and require access to Eglin
AFB in performance of their official duties must complete a base affidavit. Contact your unit
security manager for current procedures.
5.4. Communications Security (COMSEC). Inquiries concerning receipting, safeguarding,
access, transmission, accounts, custodial duties, and destruction of COMSEC materials and
equipment should be directed to 96 CS/CA, 850-882-3389, visit their website at or contact your
unit COMSEC Custodian. Contractor personnel cannot have access to COMSEC materials and
equipment unless Item 10.a. of the DD Form 254, DoD Contract Security Classification
Specification, has an "X" in the Yes column.
5.5. Operations Security (OPSEC).
5.5.1. OPSEC is the tool used to assists units in identifying critical information, OPSEC
indicators, and countermeasures and trains unit program managers and unit personnel on
current OPSEC methods. The purpose of OPSEC is to reduce the vulnerability of Air Force
missions by eliminating or reducing successful adversary collection and exploitation of
critical information. For additional information pertaining to OPSEC, see AFI 10-701,
Operations Security (OPSEC), as supplemented by AAC and AFMC. 96 ABW/IPO,
Building 1, Room 14, 850-882-5355, is the Eglin OPSEC Program Manager and OPR for the
Eglin OPSEC Program. Contact your unit OPSEC coordinator or security manager for
additional guidance.
5.5.2. HAVE HEMP Program. The HAVE HEMP Program is designed to protect sensitive
Eglin test items and resources from exploitation by adversaries. Test requesters determine
the protection required for test items, and PEs document the requirements in TDs. AAC
Instruction 10-1101, Volume I, Have Hemp, provides details on the program. The OPR is 96
ABW/IPI, Building 1, Room 14, 850-882-5355.
5.6. 46th Test Wing Security Office. This office consists of a team of security specialists and
is matrixed to the 46 TW from the Test Security IP Division. They provide security support to
46 TW customers by integrating customer requirements into the test process and handling unique
security requirements based on program needs.
5.6.1. Collateral Information. The unit security manager is your focal point. OPR is 46
TW/XPS, building 1, room 219, 850-882-3580.
5.6.2. Special Access Programs. OPR is 46 TW/Government SAP Security Office (GSSO),
building 350, room 334, 850-882-5580. As early in the SOC process as possible, dialog
needs to be established with the 46 TW/GSSO.
5.7. Physical Security. Physical security consists of countermeasures that include the use of
roving patrols on flightlines, dedicated range patrols providing random patrol coverage of the
entire range complex, range O&M contract guards at sensitive electronic warfare sites, radomes
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 43
to protect sensitive external views, shielded test chambers, and electronic intrusion detection
systems on sensitive facilities. The OPR for the Air Force Resource Protection Program is 96
SFS/S-5C, Building 272, 850-882-5259, and the OPR for Information Security (classified
materials and storage certifications) is 96 ABW/IPI, Building 1, Room 14, 850-882-7760.
5.8. Access to Central Control Facility (CCF). 46 RNCS, Building 380, 850-882-5776, will
receive requests for access to the CCF from the 46 RANG Security Office. The security office
for individuals sponsoring test events at the CCF will sent their visit requests to the 46 RANG
Security Office. An example of this request is shown in Figure 5.2. Requests can be sent to the
46 RANG Security Office via JPAS or in letter format (agency letterhead) and must contain the
following information: reason(s) access is required; name; rank (if contractor employee, indicate
company); SSAN (on the bottom of the first page of the letter, indicate that the letter contains
Personal Data Privacy Act of 1974); clearance level; organization (if contractor personnel,
indicate the sponsoring government organization and the name of the contractor employee‘s
company); contract number for contractor personnel; JON (applicable to all requests); and period
of time access is required.
5.8.1. Verification of security clearance must be indicated by the unit security manager.
5.8.2. The request must reflect a government POC from the unit making the request.
5.8.3. Units can identify individuals who can pick up classified testing data/material in their
letter in column format as well.
5.8.4. If personnel have escort privileges, escort officials must verify clearance and need to
know (as holder of the classified) for individual(s) prior to escorting personnel to the CCF.
44 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Figure 5.2. Request for CCF Access
(LETTERHEAD)
(Date)
MEMORANDUM FOR 46 RNCS
ATTN: Bldg 350 Entry Control
FROM: 46 TS/CCA
SUBJECT: CCF Access for GEN-X, JON 921BEW00
1. Individuals listed below require CCF access, escorting privileges, and access to pick up
test data to support the above test:
NAME RANK SSAN ORG CLEARANCE
Rocky, John D. Capt 555-55-5555 46 TS/OGE Secret
Bullwinkle, John Contractor 666-66-6666 ANSTEC Secret
Contract # F08626-94-C-0000
2. Access is required from 21 August 2007 through 31 December 2007.
3. The POC/TE is Mr John Doe, 46 TS/OGEA, 882-0000.
Security Manager or
Properly Designated Person
PERSONAL DATA - PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 45
5.8.1. The security office for the program test engineer (TE) sponsoring the test event at the
CCF will coordinate incoming visit requests with their TE. After coordination, they will
compile/forward the request to the 46 RANG Security Office who processes the CCF visit.
Requests should be made as far in advance as possible. This will assist in access being
granted in a timely manner for mission support.
5.8.2. Access for foreign nationals must be approved by 96 ABW/IPF and the facility
security manager. Send requests for access to 96 ABW/IPF Foreign Disclosure Officer
(FDO) and 46 RNCS. An example of this request is shown in Figure 5.3. Requests should
include the complete identification of the foreign visitor, country, purpose/justification for
the visit, and the name, office symbol, and phone number of the escort(s). 96 ABW/IPF
FDO will endorse the request for foreign national access. The sponsoring POC/TE will
coordinate with POCs at each location being visited for the completion of OPSEC surveys
prior to visit.
46 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Figure 5.3. Request for CCF Access for Foreign Personnel
(LETTERHEAD)
(Date)
MEMORANDUM FOR 96 ABW/IPF (FDO)
46 RNCS
IN TURN
ATTN: 46 RANG Security Office
FROM: 46 TS/OGEX
SUBJECT: CCF Access for Foreign Personnel
1. Request access be granted to the CCF for the following Canadian personnel:
NAME/RANK ID NUMBER CLEARANCE
Rocky, John D. N99-342-092 Cosmic Top Secret
2. Purpose/justification for the visit is . . .
3. Access is required during the period 2-13 October 2007. The POC is Mr- John Doe,
46 TS/OGEX, 882-3000.
Security Manager or
Properly Designated Person
PERSONAL DATA - PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 47
5.9. Access to Test Sites/Ranges:
5.9.1. The range O&M contractor, controls access to the test sites and Eglin ranges.
Requests must be signed by a person authorized direct communication with the range O&M
contractor for security matters. The 46 RANG Security Office will maintain a specific
access control list for the Foreign Threat Compound and forward updated visit notifications
to the O&M contractor‘s security office for that area. Requests mailed through the US Postal
Service (Figure 5.4) should be addressed to: <Range O&M Contractor Name>; Attn:
Security/Entry Control; 516 Perimeter Road, Suite 1; Eglin AFB FL 32542-5654. Requests
sent through the OMC should be addressed to: <Range O&M Contractor Name>, Attn:
Security Office, Building 955. Requests must be in letter format on letterhead stationery
(original copy) and must contain the following information: location(s) where access is
requested; reason(s) access is required; name; rank (if contractor employee, indicate
company);·SSAN (on the bottom of the first page of the letter, indicate that the letter contains
Personal Data Privacy Act of 1974); organization (if contractor personnel, indicate the
sponsoring government organization and the name of the contractor employee's company);
clearance level; and period of time access is required.
5.9.1.1. Security clearance must be verified in writing by the unit security manager or
other designated personnel.
5.9.1.2. A government POC must be indicated (unit security manager is not the POC for visits).
48 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Figure 5.4. Request for Test Site Access
(LETTERHEAD)
(Date)
MEMORANDUM FOR <Range O&M Contractor Name>
ATTN: SECURITY/ENTRY CONTROL
16 PERIMETER ROAD STE 1
EGLIN AFB FL 32542-5654
FROM: 46 TS/CC (Full address if in response to off-base office)
SUBJECT: Access to Test Areas, F-15 Tactical Electronic Warfare System (TEWS),
JON 5618EA00 and Peace Sun IX, JON FMSRAA00
1. Request the following individual be allowed access to Test Areas A-6, A-7, A-11, and
A-31 from 2 October 2007 to 1 January 2008 in support of the test program F-15 TEWS,
JON 5618EA00 and Peace Sun IX, JON FMSRAA00:
NAME RANK SSAN ORG CLEARANCE
Rocky, John D. TSgt 999-99-9999 46 OG/OGML Secret
2. A clearance is on file in the 46th Test Squadron/CCA.
3. The POC is Mr Jon Doe at 46 TS/OGEX, 850-882-0000.
Security Manager or
Properly Designated Person
PERSONAL DATA - PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 49
5.9.2. Requests for access for foreign nationals must be coordinated between the
organization hosting the foreign national, 46 TW FDO, 46 RANG Security Manager, and
InDyne Inc., Attn: Security/Entry Control. The sponsoring POC/TE will coordinate with
POCs at each location being visited for completion of OPSEC surveys prior to visit.
Requests must include a complete identification of the foreign visitors, country,
purpose/justification for the visit, and the name, office symbol, and phone number of the
escort(s). An example of this request is shown in Figure 5.5. Requests must be in letter
format on letterhead stationery and must contain the following information: location(s) where
access is requested; reason(s) access is required; level of access; name; rank/grade;
ID/passport number; visit request number; and date(s) of visit.
50 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Figure 5.5. Request for Test Area Access for Foreign Visitor
(LETTERHEAD)
(Date)
MEMORANDUM FOR 96 ABW/IPF (FDO)
<Range O&M Contractor Name>
ATTN: SECURITY/ENTRY CONTROL
IN TURN
FROM: 39 FTS/CAX
SUBJECT: Foreign Visitor Access to Test Area
1. Request access to Test Area A-6 be provided to the foreign visitor listed below from
6 December 2007 to 14 January 2008 in support of the F-16 Dispenser Weapon System
Test Program, JON CBSOHA01:
NAME PASSPORT CLEARANCE
Danner, Gerhard 0000000025 NATO Secret
Company Name: DASA/German Aerospace
Visit Request No.: GM 95-A1068
Visit Expiration: 31 December 2008
2. If you have any questions or require additional information, the POC is Ms Jane Doe,
850-882-0101.
Security Manager or
Properly Designated Person
PERSONAL DATA - PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 51
5.10. Access to Technical Library:
5.10.1. AFRL/MNOC-1 controls access to the Air Force Research Laboratory Munitions
Directorate, Technical Library, Building 300, 850-882-3212. Requests for access must be
signed by a person in a position to determine need-to-know. For government personnel, AF
Form 97, Visit Request will be utilized. Requests can be mailed via US mail to:
AFRL/MNOC-1, Technical Library, 203 West Eglin Boulevard, Suite 300, Eglin AFB FL
32542-6843, or OMC to AFRL/MNOC-1, Building 300. You may fax access requests to the
library at 850-882-3214. Hand-carried requests cannot be accepted. Requests must be
resubmitted annually to maintain continued access.
5.10.2. Contractor personnel must be employed by a company that is working on an active
Eglin contract to be eligible for access to the library. A contractor‘s request for access must
be endorsed by a government person in a position to determine need-to-know. An example
of this request is shown in Figure 5.6. Requests must be sent to the library by the same
means previously described for government personnel. Requests must be in letter format on
company letterhead stationery, endorsed by the government sponsor (original copy), and
must contain the following information: name/title; security clearance level; social security
number; contract number/expiration date; area(s) of information required (i.e., imaging
sensors infrared, synthetic aperture radar, laser radar); sponsor, office symbol, and phone
number; Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC/DAL No.). Note: The DAL No. is
assigned to the contractor on DD Form 2345, Military Critical Technical Data Agreement,
after certification with Defense Logistics Services Center (DLSC) and registration with
DTIC; and does visitor group agreement authorize storage of classified material on Eglin
(yes or no answer)?
5.11. Security Classification Guides (SCG):
5.11.1. SCGs provide guidance for classifying items and materials and should be made
available to test personnel. DoD 5200.1-I, Index of SCGs (S), 1 Sep 1996, lists all current
SCGs.
5.11.2. PEs should obtain the SCGs for classified information involved in testing. SCGs are
needed to provide adequate instructions for handling and safeguarding classified information
and materials. The unit security manager should be contacted if additional assistance in
obtaining SCGs is needed.
5.11.3. Some SCGs are maintained at the following offices on Eglin:
5.11.3.1. 96 ABW/IPI, Building 1, Room 14, 850-882-7760
5.11.3.2. 46 RANSS for Multi-Spectral Test and Training Environment (MSTTE) SCG.
See paragraph 11.4.3.
5.11.3.3. SCGs can also be obtained by writing or calling program offices.
5.12. Guards/Guard Service:
5.12.1. This service is available by contract guards or owner/user. For contract guard
support, contact 46 MOS/MXOPT at 850-882-3535/2811/2437 or 46 RANG at 850-882-
1941 (DSN 872).
52 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
5.12.2. The 96th SFS/S-5S, 850-882-5360/5431, has a Range Patrol Section with Special
Deputy US Marshals assigned. It is possible to obtain some support from the Range Patrol
Section if their current workload and manning permit. If periodic checks of buildings, test
equipment, etc., on the Eglin reservation are necessary, contact the Range Patrol Section at
850-882-5360.
5.12.3. Owner/user, in some situations, could be a consideration for protection and
controlling access. This would be participating test personnel providing protection for
classified information or to prevent pilferage. Contact your unit security manager for
assistance on determining what is best for you.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 53
Figure 5.6. Request for Technical Library Access for Contractor Personnel
(CONTRACTOR LETTERHEAD)
(Date)
46 TS/OGEX
Mr John Doe
Programming Engineer
SUBJECT: Access to Information Housed in the Vault Section of the Air Force Research
Laboratory Munitions Directorate, Technical Library
1. Request you sponsor the below-listed (company name) employee for access to the Closed
Literature Section of the Technical Library. I certify that the security clearance level shown is
valid and correct.
a. Name/title:
b. Security clearance level:
c. Social security number:
d. Contract number/expiration date:
e. Area(s) of information required: (i.e., imaging sensors infrared, synthetic aperture radar,
laser radar)
f. Sponsor: 46 TS/OGEX, Mr Doe, 850-882-3214
g. DTIC/DAL No.
h. Does your visitor group agreement authorize storage of classified material on Eglin (yes or no
answer)?
2. If the need for this access is terminated, the Technical Library‘s Facility Security Officer will
be notified immediately.
3. I also understand that this request must be resubmitted annually.
Facility Security Officer‘s typed signature block
54 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
TO: TESCO, Incorporated
I agree to sponsor the above individual and certify that the employee needs access to the
information specified.
Ralph D. Bullwinkle
Government Sponsor
Programming Engineer
5.13. Foreign Disclosure Security. 96 ABW/IPF is the OPR for developing, issuing
procedures, and interpreting policy for disclosing unclassified/classified information to foreign
governments and international organizations. For additional information, contact 46 TW Foreign
Disclosure Officer, 96 ABW/IPF, 850-882-5356. This office develops plans and programs to
carry out foreign disclosure requirements in the following areas: foreign visits to AAC units;
release of test data and briefings to foreign nationals; FMS (testing); foreign comparative tests;
International Memorandums of Understanding (MOU); data exchange agreements; information
exchange projects; procurement activities involving foreign interests; scientist and engineer
exchange program; technology transfer issues; the USAF Exchange Officer Program;
international cooperative research and program classification guidance; and overseas travel.
5.13.2. Visit Requests. DoD 5230.20-D, Visits and Assignments of Foreign
Representatives, and AFI 16-201, Air Force Foreign Disclosure and Technology Transfer
Program, set forth standard procedures concerning request of visits and attendance at
meetings by foreign representatives. During contact with the foreign representatives, it is the
policy of the US to avoid creating false impressions of its readiness to make available any
military materiel, technology, or information. Lack of strict adherence to this policy may
create problems.
5.13.2.1. A foreign representative who wishes to visit the 46 TW will submit a request
through his/her country‘s embassy in Washington D.C. The embassy will pass the
request to the Office of International Affairs who will, in turn, pass this request to the
Eglin Foreign Disclosure Office (96 ABW/IPF) via the Foreign Visit System. 96
ABW/IPF will then send a proposed foreign visit letter to the 46 TW OPR to review the
visit request. The OPR will return a letter to the 96 ABW/IPF stating whether or not
approval of the visit request is recommended and the level of classification of US
information that is to be discussed if recommending approval.
5.13.2.2. Once the Foreign Disclosure Office has reviewed the recommendation for
approval, they will send a visit authorization letter to the OPR granting the foreign
representatives access to the base stating the OPR responsibilities and disclosure
guidance for discussions with the foreign representatives. Disclosures cannot be made
without this approval memorandum. Military discussions cannot be held until receipt of
this letter.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 55
5.13.3. Disclosure of Military Information to Foreign Governments. AFPD 16-2, Disclosure
of Military Information to Foreign Governments and International Organizations, states that
all classified and unclassified military information will be treated as a national security asset,
which must be conserved and protected and which may be shared with foreign entities when
there is a clearly defined advantage for the US Government.
5.13.4. Release of Information. Transmission of tests material to foreign governments,
either to addresses located in the US or outside the US, must be on a government-to-
government basis and in accordance with AFI 16-201, Air Force Foreign Disclosure and
Technology Transfer Program. The Foreign Disclosure Office is the designated AAC
authority for release of military information to foreign nationals.
5.13.5. Request for Foreign Access/Releasability Guidance. Release of test information to
any foreign government or personnel requires prior approval in accordance with the
applicable Delegation of Disclosure Authority Letter (DDL). When sufficient details of the
test plan are known, the PE submits an AFMC Form 458, Foreign Disclosure Release
Worksheet, to 96 ABW/IPF requesting approval to release test data to the foreign
representatives. The completed form should include access requirements, test data
requirements, releasability of test data, and other pertinent information, including the level of
classification of each item and the reason the foreign representatives will need it.
5.13.6. Overseas Travel. 96 ABW/IPF approves foreign travel on AFMC Form 193 and all
documents/presentations that do not have a Public Affairs approval number. Country
clearance requests are processed by the traveler‘s unit after review of the requirements in the
Foreign Clearance Guide (FCG) for DoD and AAC employees‘ international travel
requirements, ensuring the traveler meets specific timeliness and provides required
information as outlined in the FCG. An alternative to the FCG is to use the Aircraft and
Personnel Automated Clearance System (APACS) (see Useful Links menu option in the Test
Process Tool for link).
5.14. Computer Security (COMPUSEC). COMPUSEC provides policy on protecting
automated information systems and the data generated by them. The OPR is 96 CG/SCXSI,
882-2452, Base Information Assurance Officer (BIAO). Each organization using computers to
process information should have an Information Assurance Officer (IAO) assigned.
Additionally, all computers processing unclassified sensitive information and classified
information must have a current Authorization to Operate (ATO) and Authorization to Connect
(ATC). When TDY government or contractor personnel are coming to Eglin and bringing
automated data processing equipment (ADPE) to be used in tests and to process data, the
following actions are required:
5.14.1. Check with incoming personnel and ensure their equipment has been certified and
they have a certification and accreditation (C&A) package from their home station or
company. Provide a copy of the C&A to the organization IAO for review and request
approval to operate the equipment at Eglin. This will save time and duplication of effort.
5.14.2. IAO approval will be required for test programs that will require processing of
classified or unclassified data on a computer supplied by the customer, his supporting
agencies, or contractors at a remote location at Eglin. The customer provides a list
containing the number of computers that will be used, the types/manufacturer, serial
56 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
numbers, software installed, and peripherals. The PE submits this list to the organization
IAO who, in turn, requests local approval. This process can take as much as 20 to 30 days.
5.15. Storage Containers:
5.15.1. Classified material may not be stored in containers without a General Services
Administration (GSA) label unless a trained locksmith determines that the safe meets GSA
standards. For container recertification, contact the appropriate 96th Civil Engineer Group
(CEG) zone work order desk or your unit security manager. See your building custodian for
the appropriate 96 CEG zone phone number. GSA approved containers are available through
the 46 MOS/MXOPT.
5.15.2. Container combination changes can be done by your unit safe custodian or unit
security manager. The required 5-year inspection AFTO Form 36, Maintenance Record for
Security Type Equipment, can be accomplished by your unit security manager.
5.16. Secure Rooms. These are rooms that have been certified and approved for open or
unattended storage of classified material and where AAC Form 50, Secure Storage Room/Vault
Inspection, is issued and posted in the room. This type of area is normally approved only for
classified materials or equipment that cannot be stored in a GSA container due to size or
configuration. 96 ABW/IPI, 882-7760 is the OPR for secure rooms.
5.17. Destruction of Classified. All shredders/disintegrators used to destroy sensitive
unclassified or classified material are initially inspected and posted with EAFB VA 31-10
“STOP”, Unauthorized Shredder for Classified Destruction “STOP”, or EAFB VA 31-10a
“GO”, Authorized Shredder for Classified Destruction ―GO‖, as required. Recertification is
required only upon major repair or replacement of blades or cutting devices. Contact your unit
security manager for inspection and certification. Units without destruction capability should
contact 96 ABW/IPI, 882-7760, which has a disintegrator located in the rear of Building 1 for
use by base personnel.
5.18. Safeguarding Classified. Contact your unit security manager for information and
assistance. If the name of the security manager and phone number are needed, contact 96
ABW/IPI, 882-7760.
5.19. Transmission of Classified:
5.19.1. Classified material can be hand-carried, mailed, or shipped when the requirements of
applicable directives are complied with. Information concerning hand-carrying classified can
be obtained from your unit security manager. The following general information is provided:
5.19.1.1. For government personnel, DD Form 2501, Courier Authorization, or courier
authorization memo and an exempt-from-inspection notice are sufficient for surface
travel in the local area. The same applies for travel by commercial aircraft within US, its
territories and Canada. Overseas travel by commercial aircraft requires approval by 96
ABW/IP in addition to the aforementioned requirements.
5.19.1.2. Contractor personnel must be appointed in writing by their company to perform
courier duties and must be briefed by their designated company representative. In
addition, contractor personnel must have written permission from the orders approving
authority or two-letter chief, an exempt-from-inspection notice, and a company badge or
ID card with photograph.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 57
5.19.2. There can be extenuating circumstances surrounding each situation concerning hand-
carrying classified. If there is any doubt, contact your unit security manager.
5.19.3. Information concerning mailing classified can be obtained by contacting your unit
security manager.
5.19.4. Information concerning shipping classified via commercial carrier can be obtained
by contacting 96 LRS/LGRTC, 882-8491 or your unit security manager.
5.20. Classified or Other Sensitive Conferences/Meetings. When planning a conference on
base, you are advised to call the Information Security Office (96 ABW/IPI) at 882-7760, Room
14, Building 1. No off-base classified conferences are authorized as per recent SECDEF policy
guidance. Contact the Commander‘s Action Group for more information on hosting off-base
conferences. Note: This does not apply to in-house gatherings, routine gatherings of US
government officials, classes conducted by DoD schools, or gatherings between personnel of an
AFMC component and US contractor representatives. If you are going to have a conference,
recommend a review of AFI 61-205, Sponsoring or Co-Sponsoring, Conducting, and Presenting
DoD-Related Scientific Papers at Unclassified and Classified Conferences, Symposia, and Other
Similar Meetings, and 96 ABW/IP Classified Meetings Pamphlet. When planning to conduct a
classified meeting, suggest the following questions be asked and the answers evaluated:
5.20.1. Has a meeting manager been appointed?
5.20.2. What is the meeting subject?
5.20.3. What is the approximate number of attendees?
5.20.4. What is the highest rank of the attendees? (If a general officer or civilian equivalent
are attending, the AAC/CCP, Protocol Office, 882-3011, should be notified.)
5.20.5. When will invitations be sent out? (If your meeting falls under AFI 61-205, request
approval to invite 6 months in advance through 96 ABW/IP and others specified in the
regulation. Invitations cannot be sent out until the approval is received.)
5.20.6. Will contractors be invited? (Ensure a current valid visit request is on hand.)
5.20.7. What is the highest level of classification to include special handling? (Your security
manager can assist in handling requirements for classified.)
5.20.8. Do you have a security plan?
5.20.9. Will foreign participants be excluded?
5.20.10. Where will this conference be held?
5.20.11. What storage requirements are necessary for the classified documents?
5.20.12. Will classified document control be necessary?
5.20.13. Are there any other classified equipment requirements?
5.20.14. Who will handle registration and badge issue, if required?
5.20.15. Who will handle personnel visit notifications?
5.20.16. Who will handle personnel entry and check-in during the conference?
5.20.17. How will physical security be provided, if required?
58 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
5.20.18. Are classified notes required?
5.20.19. How will classified information be distributed to participants?
5.21. Classified Munition Items. When tests involve classified munitions, see EAFBI 13-204,
Eglin Range Mission Scheduling and Control. The OPR for scheduling, handling, and protection
of classified munition items is 46 MXS/MXMWSA, 882-8362.
5.22. Industrial Security:
5.22.1. When a classified contract is to be performed on Eglin, the program/project office or
any office responsible for initiating requests for contract support is required to provide the
following to 96 ABW/IPD, 882-5823
5.22.1.1. Name and address of the contractor
5.22.1.2. Level of security clearance required
5.22.1.3. Access and storage requirements
5.22.1.4. Location of contract performance on Eglin
5.22.1.5. Name and local telephone number of contractor representative
5.22.1.6. Date the contract will be performed on base
5.22.1.7. Any special security requirements
5.22.1.8. A copy of the DD Form 254
5.22.1.9. A copy of the contractor's request for visit
5.22.1.10. Name, office symbol, and phone number of a government POC from the
government sponsoring organization.
5.22.2. When contract performance on Eglin is completed, furnish a written notice to this
effect to 96 ABW/IPD.
5.22.3. Information pertaining to contractor performance, visit request, establishment of a
long-term visitor group, intermittent performance, and base entry credentials can be obtained
from 96 ABW/IPD, 882-5823, or your unit security manager.
5.22.4. When a requirement exists for a DD Form 254, information and assistance for
completing the form can be obtained by contacting 96 ABW/IPD, 882-5823 or your unit
security manager.
5.23. Emanation Security (EMSEC) (Formerly TEMPEST). EMSEC provides policy on
controlling compromising emanations from electrical and electronic equipment. The OPR is 96
CG/SCXSI, 882-2452.
5.24. Scientific and Technical Information (STINFO). STINFO provides policy on
controlling the flow of military technical data to an adversary through the proper use of export
controls, distribution statements, and destruction notices. The OPR is AAC/EN, 850-883-3717.
For specific information, contact the 46 TW STINFO Officer, 850-882-2211.
5.25. Release of Information to the Public:
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 59
5.25.1. The Eglin Public Affairs Office (96 ABW/PA), 882-3931, is the OPR for the release
of official information. The following procedures must be followed when releasing official
information:
5.25.1.1. All proposed releases of official information will be sent to 96 ABW/PA for
review, processing, and approval. The term "release" applies to, but is not limited to,
articles, speeches, photographs, brochures, advertisements, displays, presentations, etc.
This includes proposed publicity releases by prime contractors under DoD 5220.22-M
(NISPOM), Chapter 5, Section 5.
5.25.1.2. Prime contractors are responsible for ensuring their subcontractors submit
public release material through their office to 96 ABW/PA for review and processing.
5.25.1.3. Defense contractors or other agencies must screen all information submitted for
release approval to ensure that it is both unclassified and technically accurate. Letters of
transmittal shall contain certification to this effect.
5.25.1.4. Requests for approval of public releases under the provisions of DoD 5220.22-
M (NISPOM) must be submitted to 96 ABW/PA a minimum of 45 working days prior to
the requested release date.
5.25.2. When doubt exists about the classification status of a proposed release, the final
decision shall be made by AAC/PA in coordination with the proper program management
office.
5.25.3. Information approved through 96 ABW/PA for public release can be released to
foreign nationals without prior approval from the Foreign Disclosure Office (96 ABW/IPF).
5.25.4. For tests and day-to-day functions, your unit security manager and 96 ABW/IPX (46
TW/XPS), 882-3580, provide security support.
5.26. Test Directives. The Technical Support Appendix contains a paragraph providing
instructions for data classification.
5.26.1. All classified documentation, data, and equipment must be marked in accordance
with DoD 5200.1-R, Information Security Program; AFI 31-401, Information Security
Program Management; and additional marking supplements. Contact your unit security
manager for the most current marking standards or call 96 ABW/IPI, 882-7760.
5.26.2. A classified working paper must be dated, marked as ―Working Papers‖, include
originator name, organization, and office symbol when created and can remain a classified
working paper for only 180 days. After 180 days, the working paper must be destroyed or
properly marked as a completed classified document.
5.26.3. Normally, unclassified documentation does not require marking unless it is mingled,
filed, or bound with classified.
5.26.4. The PE will conduct a security briefing for key personnel and supervisors just prior
to start of active testing for tests having unusual security requirements.
5.26.5. When a TD is classified, the Classified By or Derived From, Reason, and Declassify
On information must be listed on the first page of the directive. These markings must
comply with the current marking instructions which can be obtained from your security
manager.
60 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
5.26.6. For Official Use Only Information (FOUO). FOUO is a designation that is applied
to unclassified information that may be exempt from mandatory release to the public under
the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The FOIA specifies nine exemptions that may
qualify certain information to be withheld from release to the public if, by its disclosure, a
foreseeable harm would occur. For more details contact the Eglin FOIA Office at 882-3315
and refer to DoD 5200.1-R, Information Security Program.
5.26.7. The following statements are recommended for test directives and related
correspondence:
5.26.7.1. OPSEC and Distribution Statement: This document may be OPSEC sensitive
and contain critical information. Discuss and send this information in proprietary areas
or by proprietary channels. Distribution authorized to DoD components and DoD
contractors only. Other requests for this document shall be referred to the originator.
5.26.7.2. Destruction Notice: For unclassified, destroy by any method that prevents
disclosure of contents or reconstruction of document. For classified, document must be
disposed of in accordance with DoD 5200.1-R, Information Security Program, and AFI
31-401, Information Security Program Management.
5.26.7.3. For Official Use Only (FOUO). Documents will be marked "FOR OFFICIAL
USE ONLY" at the bottom of the front cover (if there is one), the title page (if there is
one), the first page, and the outside of the back cover (if there is one). Pages of the
document that contain FOUO information shall be marked "FOR OFFICIAL USE
ONLY" at the bottom.
5.26.7.3.1. Material other than paper documents (for example, slides, computer
media, films, etc.) shall bear markings that alert the holder or viewer that the material
contains FOUO information.
5.26.7.3.2. FOUO documents and material transmitted outside DoD must bear an
expanded marking on the face of the document so that non-DoD holders understand
the status of the information. A statement similar to this one should be used: "This
document contains information exempt from mandatory disclosure under the
Freedom of Information Act. Exemption(s) ______ apply."
5.26.8. Test directives and test related documentation should not be transmitted over any
system not properly cleared at the appropriate level. Base E-mail is appropriate for
unclassified sensitive information and below; however, it is not appropriate for transmission
of test directives and data sent off Eglin.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 61
Chapter 6
LOGISTICS SUPPORT
6.1. Introduction. This chapter is intended to serve as a logistics requirements reference source
for PEs, TEs, and others involved in planning and conducting tests at Eglin AFB. It may also be
provided to test requesters when extensive logistics requirements are anticipated. It describes
each category of logistics support and how that support can be obtained. Support is documented
in the form of a Logistics Support Appendix (LSA) and becomes part of the Test Directive (TD).
6.2. Logistics Support Appendix (LSA):
6.2.1. The LSA can be divided into 15 elements: General; Aircraft; Maintenance; Munitions;
Petroleum, Oil, and Lubricants (POL); Supply; Transportation; Civil Engineering;
Equipment; Facilities; Communications; Services; Medical; Security; and Other.
6.2.2. The LSA is prepared by the 46th Maintenance Operations Squadron, Programs and
Resources Flight, Logistics Test Support Section, (46 MOS/MXOPT) (882-5657). The
assigned logistician attends the kickoff meeting and gathers the logistics support
requirements from the customer, PE, TE, and associated documentation. A list of
preliminary customer test requirements is helpful in determining asset availability on Eglin
AFB, lateral coordination or determining customer procurement requests on assets that are
not available through other means. A test with extensive or unusual logistics requirements
should be pre-coordinated with the Logistics Test Support Section prior to the first meeting
with the customer. This eliminates the possibility of confusion during that first contact with
the test customer. The logistician will continue to attend test planning and draft TD meetings
and refine support requirements. Between meetings, the logistician will coordinate,
schedule, and finalize all support in preparation for inclusion in the TD.
6.2.2.1. General. This element will always include a standard statement of introduction.
As the LSA is often a stand-alone document, it will also include a brief description of the
test. The estimated test start/stop dates will be reflected here. If the document is
amending an original appendix, it will be stated here as well as in the title area.
6.2.2.2. Aircraft. This category will document the test aircraft, the owning command,
the estimated number of missions, sorties, ground mounts and flying hours, and whether
photo-chase aircraft will be required. Tanker, target, shooter, range sweep, and
interceptor aircraft are addressed in this section. Special notes are included on aircraft
configuration and required modifications for the test.
6.2.2.3. Maintenance:
6.2.2.3.1. TDY Aircraft. Aircraft TDY to Eglin for test support are expected to be
supported by crew chiefs and specialists from the aircraft‘s home station. In all cases,
the home station must expect to support any heavy maintenance requirements, such as
engine changes and aircraft jacking. Unique equipment, such as tow bars, must be
brought from home station. Requests for personnel and equipment from the 46 MXG
must be requested in writing well in advance of the test in order to ensure availability,
manpower and funding requirement prior to the request date. Note: Weekend testing
must be schedule in advance as the 46 MXG Maintenance Operations Control Center
62 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
(MOCC) is only opened from Sunday at 2300 hrs until Friday at 2400 hrs. Any
testing during weekend MUST be pre-coordinated for budgetary purposes since the
MOCC is manned by contractors.
6.2.2.3.2. Support Equipment. Aircraft support equipment is provided on a dispatch,
non-dedicated basis unless requested and funded by the home station. Non-dedicated
is defined as ―available for 2 hours or less.‖ Non-powered support equipment must
be picked up and returned by the user. Powered support equipment is delivered by
AGE; however, AGE does not deliver to sites outside of Eglin main.
6.2.2.3.3. Avionics. Avionics shop support can be provided only for aircraft of the
same type as those assigned to Eglin. Limited backshop access can normally be
provided to all customers. Backshop and avionics support should be well-defined to
verify the requested support is within the capabilities of that shop.
6.2.2.3.4. Precision Measurement Equipment Laboratory (PMEL). A list of all
government-owned equipment should be furnished to ensure supportability by the
PMEL. Any unique test equipment should be shipped to Eglin by test team
personnel.
6.2.2.3.5. Hangars. Hangar space is extremely limited and will not be dedicated to
visiting aircraft. Should heavy maintenance be required during inclement weather,
hangar space will be assigned on a space available basis. When available, hangar
space may be provided for performing maintenance regardless of the weather.
Customers will be required to remain in compliance with all OSHA, safety and
housekeeping compliance during their stay. Customers are subject to spot inspections
to ensure compliance with procedures.
6.2.2.3.6. Crew Chiefs. Upon arrival at Eglin or as soon as practicable thereafter,
TDY crew chiefs will report to the flightline superintendent for a flightline orientation
and safety briefing.
6.2.2.4. Munitions. When a request for test is under consideration, the PE should first
determine if conventional munitions must be expended to conduct the test. Munitions
requirements are identified in writing to the AAC Munitions Accountable Supply Officer
(MASO), 46 MXS/MXMWMA, 883-7624. Note: Missiles are USAF-controlled items
which, if required to support testing, must be requested from HQ AFMC who, in turn,
must obtain authorization from HQ USAF. This is accomplished by the MASO.
6.2.2.4.1. When nonstandard munitions (i.e., fuzes, fins, bombs, missiles, etc.) are to
be carried on Eglin aircraft, consideration must be given to the following:
6.2.2.4.1.1. Develop loading checklists in accordance with AFI 21-101, Aircraft
and Equipment Maintenance Management, Munitions Loading Standardization
and Training Program, and Checklist Development. The TE is responsible for
submitting mission requests within Center Scheduling Enterprise (CSE) to
schedule the ground mount and request munitions services. The TE must also
ensure that adequate technical data and a Materiel Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) are
available to support this requirement.
6.2.2.4.1.2. When the test item will be up/downloaded more than once, dedicated
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 63
load crews must be trained. To provide for this training, the PE and/or TE must
make arrangements for the test item to be available sufficiently in advance of the
first mission to permit checklist development and load crew training to be
completed.
6.2.2.4.1.3. When nonstandard munitions are shipped to Eglin, a technical data
package (in accordance with AACI 21-202, Munitions Technical Data, and AFI
21-201, Conventional Munitions Maintenance Management, must be available to
the Munitions Flight and the 96th
Civil Engineer Group, Explosive Ordnance
Disposal (EOD) (96 CEG/CED) prior to receipt. All munitions should be shipped
to: FV2823; 2605 Perimeter Road, Suite 112; Eglin AFB FL 32542-5000; Mark
For: (Applicable JON); Attn: (TE‘s name and number, or the logistician‘s
name/number).
6.2.2.4.2. EOD support is addressed in the Civil Engineer category.
6.2.2.5. Environmental Management. The sponsoring organization will notify the Unit
Environmental Coordinator (UEC) of incoming deployments to ensure compliance with
relevant environmental requirements to include, but not limited to, hazardous material,
hazardous waste, air quality, natural and cultural resources, and solid waste and
recycling.
6.2.2.5.1. Hazardous Material Management. The sponsoring organization will
request that the deploying unit identify HAZMAT usage (materials and amounts)
required for the duration of the deployment, identify HAZMAT (materials and
amounts) the deploying unit plans to take with it from the home station, and identify
HAZMAT (materials and amounts) sustainment requirements to include war reserve
materials.
6.2.2.5.1.1. If Air Force (military/civilian/contractors), the sponsoring
organization will obtain completed AF Form 3952 authorizations for the use of
each identified HAZMAT requirement. Ensure the AF Forms 3952 identify any
special environmental, safety, and/or occupational health (ESOH) considerations
for deployed unit usage (e.g., additional PPE not needed in normal shop
environment or additional training for personnel not already trained in the usage
of a given HAZMAT).
6.2.2.5.1.2. The sponsoring organization will coordinate HAZMAT management
requirements for the duration of the deployment.
6.2.2.5.1.3. The sponsoring organization will request copies of the current
manufacturer-specific MSDSs for each HAZMAT the deployed unit plans to use
(if unavailable at Eglin in the Hazardous Material Management System
(HMMS)). The sponsoring organization will request approved copies of AF
Forms 3952 authorizing the chemical for a specific process or equivalent listing of
information from the standardized Air Force HAZMAT tracking system.
6.2.2.5.1.4. The sponsoring organization will track HAZMAT usage data for the
duration of the deployment (regardless of the source of the HAZMAT) using
HMMS.
64 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
6.2.2.5.1.5. The sponsoring organization will notify Eglin‘s HAZMAT Cell of
any serviceable HAZMAT the deployed unit is taking back to the home station.
6.2.2.5.1.6. The sponsoring organization will ensure proper disposition of excess
HAZMAT and/or any hazardous waste generated.
6.2.2.6. Petroleum, Oil, and Lubricants. JP-8 fuel is standard and is requested through
the Maintenance Operations Center (MOC) or the Resource Control Center. Servicing is
charged to the aircraft identaplates (servocards). If a contractor-owned aircraft that does
not possess an identaplate is to be used, arrangements must be coordinated to clear the
aircraft to receive government fuel. Some foreign military aircraft do not possess
identaplates. Charges may be made to a locally generated servocard or to an embassy
address.
6.2.2.6.1. JP-5 fuel is not stocked or utilized by aircraft assigned to Eglin. When this
fuel is required in support of a test, arrangements must be made for a tank to hold the
fuel. This fuel is procured in bulk, and credit cannot be given for any amount not
used before the end of the test. This can be a long-lead item. If a tank is required,
customer must pay for it.
6.2.2.6.2. Hazardous materials will be coordinated through the sponsoring
organization of each test (i.e., the responsible test organization (RTO)). All
requirements/waste issues will be coordinated through the respective RTO‘s unit
HAZMAT issue point for customer issues.
6.2.2.6.3. POL analysis capability is very limited. When analysis is required beyond
existing capabilities, samples are shipped to MacDill AFB, Florida.
6.2.2.7. Supply. Supply items required for test support can normally be provided
through the 46 TW Logistics Materiel Control Activity (LMCA) (46 TSSQ/TSRM).
Reimbursement is effected from the applicable JON for all items supplied. A supply
account is established for tests with high-volume, long-term requirements. Aircraft parts
may be deployed to Eglin in a Mission Support Kit (MSK) accompanying the aircraft, or
needed parts can be ordered from the home station.
6.2.2.8. Equipment. Sufficient office and shop equipment is normally available in the
facilities reserved for visiting test teams. If additional equipment is required, it must be
requisitioned through the supply system using test funds, or the test requester must
provide it from other sources. Sufficient lead time must be allowed for requisitioning
equipment items, e.g., computers, reproduction copiers, and test equipment. LMCA is not
responsible for providing equipment. Logistics coordinates through LMCA to procure
resources not available on Eglin.
6.2.2.9. Transportation. Project support vehicles can be provided by the 96th Logistics
Readiness Squadron (96 LRS/LGRDDO). The Squadron account is reimbursed from test
funds by a mileage charge per vehicle. Normally, any test deploying aircraft to Eglin will
require a truck with a pintle hook for towing support equipment on the flightline. Vans
(up to eight-packs), four-wheel drives, and metros are available.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 65
6.2.2.9.1. Packing, crating, and shipping requirements are also identified under this
heading. Charges will be against the test JON. For all outgoing shipments, a DD
Form 1149 is required.
6.2.2.9.2. All non-munition test items, support equipment, or test-related material to
be shipped to Eglin for testing must be shipped as follows to avoid involvement with
the supply system: Transportation Officer; 201 Biscayne Road, Bldg 613; Eglin AFB
FL 32542-5303; Mark for: (Test JON); Attn: (TE or logistician‘s name and number).
6.2.2.9.3. Assistance in loading/unloading aircraft will be provided by 96
LRS/LGRDAS. The following information must be provided to 46 MOS/MXOPT
prior to arrival/departure of the aircraft to arrange support: mission, tail number,
arrival/departure times, call sign, number of pallets, rolling stock, and number of
passengers/crew.
6.2.2.10. Civil Engineer:
6.2.2.10.1. The following test support requirements are covered under this heading:
6.2.2.10.1.1. Facilities modification/construction
6.2.2.10.1.2. Heavy equipment support
6.2.2.10.1.3. Janitorial services
6.2.2.10.1.4. Port-o-let/dumpster rental
6.2.2.10.1.5. EOD support is included when required to recover live fuzes or safe
the range for spotting impact patterns, etc.
6.2.2.10.1.6. Aircraft fleet service
6.2.2.10.2. Civil Engineer does not respond to tasking in the Logistics Appendix
alone. Prearranged support must be followed up with AF Form 332, Basic Civil
Engineer (BCE) Work Request (for construction and facility modification
requirements), to request equipment support on ranges or Climatic Lab, or by letter
for port-o-let, janitorial services, and heavy equipment requirements. Your
logistician will handle all of the above paperwork.
6.2.2.11. Facilities. Various shop and office spaces are maintained for housing test
teams and contractors. The spaces are equipped with a limited amount of shop and office
furniture. The test requester must inspect the facility assigned as early as possible in the
planning process and be prepared to provide funds for any additional equipment required
for special electrical power, modifications desired, etc. Additional space requirements
are a long lead-time item. Facility support requirements must be made known at the
earliest possible time due to the critical shortage of adequate test project facilities.
Customers who require ―long-term‖ housing for a test (more than 6 months), must
coordinate with the logistician to ensure Eglin real estate office and space management
committee are involved as current test facilities are limited and not for ―long-term‖ use.
Customers who use facilities are responsible for pre/post inspections, and may be subject
to a facility Memorandum of Agreement or Letter of Agreement during their stay. This is
especially important with dual use/dual occupancy tests. Facility damage incurred during
66 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
the test will be charged to the appropriate test JON to ensure corrective action has been
met based on the post facility inspection.
6.2.2.12. Communications. Government-furnished Class A phone service will be
provided for contractors only if specified in their contract. Contractors and foreign
military tests can make arrangements for installation of phone service to assigned
facilities by calling Century Link at 888-723-8010. Century Link will need the following
information: billing address, building number and street address, and the phone
requirements. Century Link will contact 96 CS/SCXQ, (882-9246) and they will issue
the proper work orders to ensure compatibility with base systems. The test requester
should provide a diagram of assigned space (as early as possible) indicating location of
instruments, which instruments should ring, and lines to be on each instrument. A
minimum of 15 working days is required for normal phone line installation.
Compatibility and unique requirements should be addressed to 96 CS/SCMT, 882-4881.
6.2.2.12.1. Fax machines are normally available but can also be leased or purchased
and set up in assigned facilities. The same rules apply to a dedicated fax line for
contractors and foreign military tests. Charges will be against the JON.
6.2.2.12.2. Copy machines can be leased for use. An estimated number of copies and
any special requirements should be supplied to the assigned logistician.
6.2.2.12.3. Hand-held radios are available through 96 CG. Your logistician can
arrange for a limited number of radios for short-duration use.
6.2.2.13. Services. When visiting test teams and contractors are involved in the test, the
following subjects should be addressed:
6.2.2.13.1. Billeting arrangements (normally made by visiting units)
6.2.2.13.2. Messing arrangements for enlisted personnel - In-flight lunches are
available
6.2.2.13.3. Laundry and dry cleaning information
6.2.2.13.4. Postal service information, Base Exchange, clubs, and recreational areas.
6.2.2.14. Medical. This heading will be used to inform civilians and contractors that
emergency medical service will be provided in accordance with applicable instructions.
It includes the telephone number for ambulance service.
6.2.2.15. Security. All visitors, including TDY military contractor personnel, DoD
civilians, TEs, etc., must have flightline passes or be escorted by authorized personnel to
enter restricted aircraft parking areas. These areas are designated by red lines and
appropriate information painted on the cement. Letters that include names, home station
badge numbers, and clearance levels should be sent by the PE to the 96th Security Forces
Squadron (96 SFS/SFO) and the 46th Operations Support Squadron (46 OSS/CCQ).
Special aircraft security requirements can be arranged through 96 SFS. The security
manager for the 46 MOS or the assigned logistician is available to set safe and door
combinations in project support facilities.
6.2.2.16. Optional. When requirements are identified that are not applicable to other
subjects listed in this appendix, the appropriate heading should be listed with the
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 67
appropriate wordage (examples: Chaplain Services, Personnel Services, Aircraft
Security, etc.).
6.3. Distribution. All organizations tasked and significantly involved are provided a copy of
the Logistics Support Appendix. This list will not appear on the master copy but will appear on
one of the two copies provided to the PE as well as on the TE‘s copy.
6.4. Logistics Support Checklist.
Table 6.1. Logistics Support Checklist
LOGISTICS SUPPORT CHECKLIST
1. Aircraft:
Specific Eglin aircraft required: Serial numbers:
Is photo/safety chase required:
What type aircraft:
Tanker support required:
Target aircraft support required:
Visiting Aircraft: Type/owning command:
Contractor Aircraft: Do they have landing permit/servocard:
2. Maintenance:
Will customer be bringing own AGE equipment:
Will customer need download assistance:
What type aircraft/special equipment required:
To what area: Do you have special maintenance requirements, i.e.,
KC-135 tow bar/tractor:
Do you require special parking arrangements (close to a specific building):
Do you require hand-held radios:
Do you require hangar space:
Who will maintain test item:
Do you require any special gases, i.e., nitrogen:
3. Munitions:
Will munitions be shipped to Eglin:
Will munitions be shipped to on-site location (addresses will be provided):
Do you require special munitions delivery:
68 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Is technical data available/checklists (does one need to be developed):
4. POL:
Does aircraft have servoplate:
Do you have excessive fuel requirements:
Is customer able to provide fuel drivers:
Do you require ground fuel: Types/Amounts:
Do you require fuel keys for rental vehicles:
Do you require delivery of any fuels to the ranges:
Do you require Spill Response support in case of mishap:
5. Supply:
Do you have any special supply requirements:
Do you require supply account for expendables/consumables:
Will customer be shipping/bringing a mission supply kit (MSK):
6. Equipment
Do you require faxes/copiers/water service:
7. Transportation:
If customer is bringing AGE, what assistance will be required:
Is special equipment required for test, i.e., forklifts:
Are military vehicles required:
(Shipping address will be provided for typical shipments)
Is packaging required for outgoing shipments:
8. Civil Engineer
Are any work orders required:
Do you require dumpsters/port-o-lets/fleet service:
Do you have special range support requirements; manpower, crane:
EOD:
Typical EOD support:
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 69
Any non-typical EOD support required, i.e., on-site:
FIRE DEPARTMENT: (This area falls under CE)
Do you require fire bottles:
Do you require special Fire Department support, i.e., on-site:
NATURAL RESOURCES:
Do you require wildfire support from AAC/EMSN (Jackson Guard):
9. Facilities:
Do you have special power requirements:
Do you require trailers:
Do you require janitorial service:
Do you have special furniture requirements, require safes:
Do you require storage for test items/equipment:
Do you require facilities at Duke Field: (Bldg 3057 is the only facility that the 46
TW has at Duke and constantly used)
Are there any live munitions involved:
Do you have hazardous materials/hazardous waste storage and disposal
requirements:
10. Communications
Do you require phones, STU-III, fax machines, copier
11. Services:
Do you require flight lunches
12. Medical:
Do you require on-site medical
13. Security:
Do you require flightline access (access list must be provided):
Do you require guard service:
Do you require special aircraft security:
70 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Chapter 7
INTERNATIONAL TEST PLANNING AND DOCUMENTATION
7.1. Introduction: There are currently two circumstances that will require testing of foreign or
US systems and equipment as related to foreign entities. Section 21 of the Arms Export Control
Act, as amended, authorizes the sale of defense articles and defense services to foreign countries.
7.1.1. Foreign Military Sales (FMS). The foreign military sales (FMS) process
fundamentally is an acquisition process. Under FMS, a foreign government or international
organization identifies a need for a military-related item or service and chooses to acquire it
from the U.S. government (USG). The government-to-government sales agreement
governing the acquisition is the letter of offer and acceptance (LOA). To fulfill the LOA
requirements, the USG may supply items or services from on-hand Department of Defense
(DoD) resources or the USG may purchase from industry for subsequent delivery to the FMS
customer. Testing through FMS is funded by the foreign country or international
organization and charges are at FMS rates.
7.1.2. Foreign Comparative Testing (FCT). FCT is a combination of two previous test
categories called Foreign Weapons Evaluation and NATO Comparative Tests. Unlike FMS,
these tests evaluate foreign-developed items for potential use in US inventory. They are
funded by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and are charged at DoD rates. This
type of testing requires detailed test planning 6 to 10 months before program approval and 10
to 15 months before funding.
7.2. Foreign Military Sales Tests:
7.2.1. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to show the differences in documentation of
DoD tests and FMS tests and to provide specific instructions and guidance for FMS tests
(Figure 7.1).
7.2.2. Letter of Request (LOR). The FMS program, with proper approval, permits eligible
foreign governments to purchase defense articles, services, and training from the US
Government. The purchasing government pays all costs that may be associated with a sale.
The first step in the FMS process is the LOR from the eligible foreign government requesting
the purchase of defense articles and services. This is officially submitted through the foreign
government‘s embassy in Washington DC. The embassy normally submits the LOR to the
Air Force Security Assistance Center (AFSAC) for processing. AFSAC is the USAF center
of expertise for Security Assistance /Foreign Military Sales. AFSAC has established WEB
based LOR Automation Users Guide (see Useful Links menu option in the Test Process Tool
for link). For more details, contact the AFSAC Help Desk at (937) 257-4390. More
information is also available from AFSAC online (see Useful Links menu option in the Test
Process Tool for link).
7.2.3. Price and Availability (P&A). After receipt of an LOR, AFSAC evaluates the request
and assigns the case to the appropriate Command Country Manager (CCM). The CCM, in
turn, will request P&A data. The P&A is prepared by DoD components in response to a
foreign government request for preliminary data for the possible purchase of a defense article
or service. P&A data show projected availabilities and estimated costs for defense articles
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 71
and services. Furnishing these data does not constitute a commitment for the US
Government to offer for sale the articles and services for which the data are provided. P&A
data should be detailed and accurate. The format for the P&A is similar to a SOC and can be
signed by squadron commanders or his/her designated representatives. Note: Foreign
governments or foreign industries that want to test systems at Eglin are never the direct
customer; the usual customer is AFSAC or a SPO. Foreign commercial customers are
required to go through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) procedures authorized by the Arms
Control Act before the MRTFB can provide services to the customer, (per DoD FMR
7000.14-R, Volume 11A, Chapter 12, paragraph 120203-B-3). Direct commercial contracts
with foreign customers to conduct testing at Eglin are not authorized.
Figure 7.1. Foreign Military Sales Process
7.2.3.1. Effective 1 January 1990, implementation of Public Law 101-165, ―The Fair
Pricing Legislation‖, DoD Appropriations Act of Fiscal Year 1990, 21 Nov 1989, all
FMS cases for Israel, Egypt, and Turkey are considered wholly financed with non-
repayable FMS credit funds, regardless of the terms reflected in the LOA, unless the
cognizant military department or agency can show documentary evidence that the case is
financed with country-owned resources or has been advised by the Defense Security
Cooperation Agency (DSCA) that the case is financed with country cash resources. As
such, these countries will not pay US military salaries and entitlements. If you have a
case with one of these countries, contact 46 TW/FM and the case CCM before creating a
JON to determine what applies to your case and how to compute the P&A data.
72 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
7.2.3.2. FMS customers on cases financed with national funds or such funds mixed with
US government financing will continue to pay US military salaries and entitlements.
7.2.4. Letter of Offer and Acceptance (LOA). P&A estimates are used to prepare the Letter
of Offer and Acceptance (LOA) by AFSAC for the sale of military articles and services to a
foreign government. The LOA lists the items and/or services, estimated costs, and terms and
conditions of the sale, and provides for the foreign government‘s signature to indicate
acceptance. Each LOA is commonly referred to as a ―case‖ and is assigned a case identifier
for accounting purposes. The signed LOA becomes a formal contract between the US
Government and the foreign government or international organization.
7.2.5. International Program Directive (IPD). Similar to a TD, the IPD authorizes the
responsible activity to provide the materiel/services described in the LOA. It also provides
general and specific instructions not included in the LOA. The IPD is coordinated by the
CCM and signed out by the AFSAC Case Manager (CM). The process begins when AFSAC
receives a signed LOA. Once the LOA has been signed and the foreign government makes
the required deposit in the Denver Center of the Defense Finance and Accounting Trust
Fund, AFSAC sends the LOA and the IPD to the 46 TW as the implementing directive for
execution of the FMS case.
7.2.6. International Programs Security. The unique security aspects of these programs are
discussed in Chapter 5.14 of this guide.
7.3. Foreign Comparative Testing (FCT). The FCT Program was established to test and
evaluate foreign non-developmental equipment that demonstrates potential to satisfy sponsor
requirements. FCT is proposed and conducted by the appropriate service on non-developmental
systems of equipment that have been identified by the operational forces as having a good
potential to satisfy a valid DoD requirement. The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD)
Comparative Testing Office (CTO), provides direction to, and administers the FCT Program.
OSD CTO funds testing and evaluation; the Services fund all procurements that result from a
successful test.
7.3.1. The OSD FCT Homepage contains additional information (see Useful Links menu
option in the Test Process Tool for link). Also available at the website is the OSD CTO
Procedures Handbook. This handbook provides direction, policy and procedures to
stakeholders participating in FCT Programs.
7.3.2. For the Air Force, potential programs are submitted by the sponsoring organization,
(normally a System Program Office), to the Office of the Undersecretary of the Air Force for
International Affairs, Armament Cooperation Division, (SAF/IAPQ). Once the FCT is
approved, the sponsoring organization will designate an RTO to conduct the appropriate
T&E. From this point, funding, execution, documentation, and reporting requirements are
the same as for any other DoD test.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 73
Chapter 8
PRIVATE INDUSTRY TEST PLANNING AND DOCUMENTATION
8.1. Introduction. Private industry can have access to AAC capabilities and facilities through
two primary ―avenues‖: commercial test contracts, and technology transfer (T2) agreements.
Commercial test contracts, likely to be the routine procedure for accessing AAC capabilities and
facilities, are now available to all private industries. Technology transfer agreements may
include possibilities for alliances or partnerships and must share an element of technology
required within the AAC mission area.
8.2. Commercial Test Contracts:
8.2.1. Acceptance Criteria:
8.2.1.1. The FY94 Defense Authorization Act (Public Law (P.L.) 103-160) authorized
private use of Major Range Test Facility Base (MRTFB) facilities at ―flexible prices‖
without requiring government contract, sponsorship, or Cooperative Agreement. ―Private
use‖ includes universities and local, state, and federal agencies. The law authorizes the
Secretary of Defense (SecDef) to enter into contracts with commercial entities for test
and evaluation at these facilities. In accordance with the law, the SecDef delegates the
authority to enter into commercial contracts to the MRTFB commanders. Any
commercial entity that seeks test support from AAC and meets any of the following
criteria is eligible for commercial rates: operates in a US state or territory; registered with
a State Department of Commerce; or files taxes in said US state or territory.
8.2.1.2. Commercial workload will be accepted to fill underutilized capacity in AAC test
facilities and capabilities. P.L. 103-160 restricts the availability of resources to
commercial entities so the test resources remain available for their primary function of
DoD support. AAC/PK is the only organization that can legally bind with a contractual
agreement the Government and the commercial customer.
8.2.2. Cost Estimating:
8.2.2.1. P.L. 103-160 requires the SecDef to charge for all direct costs plus appropriate
indirect costs. Prices must be set so the test center incurs no increased institutional
funding requirements or infrastructure support costs. The local MRTFB commander has
the authority to determine the appropriate portion of indirect costs to pass on to the
commercial customer. The law prohibits the use of this authority for expanding either
capability or capacity.
8.2.2.2. Refer to Chapter 4 for computing the cost of testing for commercial customers.
8.2.2.3. Use of DoD Rates for Commercial Tests. DoD rates can be used for a
commercial test provided a contract exists with a DoD agency where it is clearly stated
that the use of an MRTFB will be ―Government-Furnished Services‖. DoD Financial
Management Regulation 7000.14-R, Volume 11A, Chapter 12, Para 120203.B.4:
Government-Furnished Services states, ―When the use of an MRTFB activity has been
included in a contractual agreement as government-furnished services, the user shall be
charged based on the category of the contracting government agency‖, (see Useful Links
menu option in the Test Process Tool for link to DODFMR 7000.14-R). The available
74 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
documentation should be forwarded to the PE‘s financial analyst for review, prior to
establishing a JON.
8.2.2.3.1. The recommend wording to authorize DoD rates for a commercial test
should paraphrase the following: ―The contractor, at its election, has arranged for a
DOD Major Range & Test Facility Base (MRTFB) to perform test requirements of
this contract as generally may be described in the contract. For the purpose of
determining the appropriate rate payable by the contractor to the MRTFB for that test
support, and only for that purpose, the support shall be deemed to be ―government
furnished‖ (reference the DOD 7000.14-R, Vol. 11A, Chapter 12, Paragraph
120203.B.4 Financial Management Regulation). The obligations of the MRTFB with
respect to that support shall be governed by the terms of the test agreement between
the contractor and the test activity. No obligations of the MRTFB shall be imputed to
the government contracting activity under this contract, nor shall any failure of the
MRTFB to perform such obligations give rise to any contractor rights or defenses
under this contract.‖
8.2.3. Test Documentation:
8.2.3.1. Statement of Capability (SOC) (See 13.2.9.). The SOC costs can be developed
using the automated estimating system by inputting a JON beginning with the letters
―CB.‖ The bottom-line cost figure from the SOC will be used in the test contract. The
estimated schedule, (start and stop dates) from the SOC will be used in the schedule
portion of the test contract. Commercial SOCs become an attachment to the test contract.
Commercial SOCs can be signed by the Squadron Commander or his/her designated
representatives.
8.2.3.2. Test Directive (TD). The TD is prepared in the same manner as the TD for DoD
programs (see 13.2.13.) with the exception that the Method of Test (MOT) will be
attached to the test contract as the Statement of Work (SOW).
8.2.3.3. Test Contract. A test contract will need to be executed between the customer
(requesting commercial entity) and the government. Once signed, the PE forwards the
SOC to the Procuring Contracting Official (PCO) in AAC/PK, who will use the SOC
information to execute the contract. The PE should be careful not to duplicate any
contractual clauses in the SOC. The commercial test customer and the contracting
officer‘s signatures on the test contract represent the formal acceptance of the workload.
8.2.4. Funding:
8.2.4.1. Advanced Payments. Prior to the start of active testing, all of the requested
funds must be on hand and available in JOCAS. The funds are transferred by prepaid
check to 46 TW/FMP. If at any time it is determined that additional funds will be
required, coordinate with 46 TW/FM to determine if the test must be stopped prior to
securing additional funds. In any case, a modification to the contract through AAC/PK
will be required. Commercial customers cannot normally issue additional funds without
a modification to the contract.
8.2.4.2. Test Closeout. Costs for man-hours and other resources will be charged to the
appropriate JON as with any test. When the test is completed, the PE will notify and
send the final cost determination to AAC/PK. AAC/PK will issue a close-out
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 75
modification to the contract. The close-out modification will adjust the contract price to
reflect the actual costs of the test at completion. Upon issuance of the Government check
to the commercial customer, or the receipt of the commercial test customer check, the
contract will be considered closed.
8.3. Technology Transfer (T2) Agreements:
8.3.1. Concept:
8.3.1.1. The basic concept of ―technology transfer‖ is that the fruits of taxpayer
investment in government-wide research and development (R&D) activities have not
been used for the benefit of the private sector as much or as well as they should be.
Through statutes, executive orders, and regulations, there have been declarations of
national intent to promote private sector use of the technology resident in government
laboratories and other resources of the executive branch.
8.3.1.2. To reduce confusion, AAC has redefined T2 into two separate parts for local
use:
8.3.1.2.1. A T2 opportunity exists when the intent of AAC is to transfer Air Force
knowledge/capabilities to the partner(s) or when AAC and the partner intent is to
work together to create/develop a mutually beneficial product or process which does
not currently exist.
8.3.1.2.2. If the intent of the customer is merely to use our facilities and capabilities
to prove/demonstrate a product, it is ―Use of Facilities‖ and is not T2.
8.3.1.3. The AFMC Technology Transfer Guidebook (available in AAC/DRX) lists 12
different ―mechanisms‖ which can be utilized to carry out T2. These 12 mechanisms are
listed and described in Table 8.3. The ―Use of Facilities‖ mechanism will probably be
utilized the most, followed (in order) by Cooperative Research and Development
Agreements (CRADA), Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR), and consulting by
AAC.
8.3.2. Customer. T2 is primarily applicable to interactions with non-DoD entities. AAC can
support or enter into agreements with academic institutions; federal, state or local
government agencies; or domestic businesses. The guiding criteria are that ―the purpose for
which an agreement is entered into must be consistent with AAC‘s military mission.‖ AAC
can support or work with nearly anyone provided the activity is legitimate and is associated
with our core or core-related missions. Priority is also placed on the potential customer being
domestic, i.e., a business or organization incorporated in the US.
8.3.3. Who Gets Customer Inquiry:
8.3.3.1. AAC/DRX - The Advanced Concepts Division is the AAC point of contact
(POC) for non-DoD customers. If the inquiry involves use of facilities/capabilities, the
agency that will conduct the activity will be promptly notified.
8.3.3.2. AAC will support customers wanting to use our facilities through either a test
contract or a CRADA.
8.3.3.3. If the Test Execution Organization (TEO) is contacted first, the TEO will
determine whether the support should be provided through a test contract or a CRADA
76 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
by using the CRADA Flags (Figure 8.1). If the inquiry involves other than use of
facilities, the customer should be referred to DRX for support.
Figure 8.1. CRADA Flags
1. Emerging technology versus business as usual
2. Mutual interest/benefit versus use of facilities
3. Expand AAC technical knowledge versus routine work
4. Product/process for commercial market versus military market
8.3.3.4. Customer contacts may be received anywhere: DRX; 46 TW/XPX, 96 CCSG,
etc. If the POC is other than DRX and the POC clearly knows who the customer needs to
talk to, tell the customer which office will call back. If the POC does not know who to
have call the customer, contact DRX and have them work the inquiry.
8.3.4. Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRADA):
8.3.4.1. What Is A CRADA? As defined in AFPD 61-3, Domestic Technology Transfer,
a CRADA is, ―An agreement between one or more federal laboratories and/or technical
activities and one or more nonfederal parties. Under a CRADA, the government
laboratories and/or technical activities shall provide personnel, services, facilities,
equipment, or other resources with or without reimbursement (but not funds to the
nonfederal parties). CRADAs are instruments that may be used in all aspects of a
product and/or system life cycle where RDT&E activities occur. The nonfederal parties
shall provide funds, personnel, services, facilities, equipment, or other resources toward
the conduct of specified research and development efforts that are consistent with the
missions of the laboratory and/or technical activity. The CRADA partners shall share in
the intellectual property developed under the effort. This term does not include a
procurement contract or cooperative agreement as used in 31 U.S.C. §§ 6303, 6304, and
6305.‖
8.3.4.1.1. In practical terms a CRADA is the written agreement between AAC and its
partner(s). A CRADA is not a government contract; therefore, it is not subject to
Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) so competitions are not required nor is AAC
obligated to make the same opportunities available to everyone.
8.3.4.1.2. Generally, the purpose of the CRADA partnership should be to create or
develop new technical knowledge or products. The AAC contributions to the
partnership will most likely be the facilities, equipment, or technical skills used to
carry out military missions.
8.3.4.2. When To Use A CRADA:
8.3.4.2.1. A CRADA is not a substitute for a commercial test contract. A test
contract permits use of our capabilities for a fee. A CRADA is used to transfer
technology per the AAC T2 definition: A T2 opportunity exists when the intent of
AAC is to transfer Air Force knowledge/capabilities to the non-DoD partner(s) or
when AAC and the partner(s) intent is to work together to create/develop a mutually
beneficial product or process which does not currently exist.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 77
8.3.4.2.2. To further assist in identifying when a CRADA may be appropriate, the
―Flags‖ in Figure 8-1 are provided. These flags highlight conditions which, if
present, may indicate a CRADA opportunity. If uncertain, contact AAC/DRX for
clarification.
Table 8.2. Technology Transfer (T2) Mechanisms
Technology Transfer (T2) Guidance
Table
Mechanisms Description Use Organizations
Affected OPR OCR
Use of AAC
Facilities
A commercial
customer who uses
AAC facilities or
equipment for his
singular benefit can
do so under a
commercial use
agreement. Primary
benefit to AAC is
customer
reimbursements.
When a customer
uses our facilities
for his purposes
and we do not
significantly
participate in the
development of
his process or
product, a
commercial use
agreement is used.
DRX, JA, AS,
PK, FM,
Execution
Agency
(Partner)
Exec
Agency
DRX
Cooperative
Research and
Development
Agreement
(CRADA)
A written agreement
with negotiated terms
where AAC
materially participates
in the development of
a process, product or
technology.
Government rights
must be clearly
described in the
agreement.
This mechanism is
used where AAC
may substantially
contribute to the
development of a
marketable
process or product.
Royalty income
can accrue to AAC
from CRADAs.
DRX, JA, AS,
PK, FM,
Execution
Agency
(Partner)
Exec
Agency
DRX
78 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Technology Transfer (T2) Guidance
Table
Mechanisms Description Use Organizations
Affected OPR OCR
Small
Business
Innovative
Research
(SBIR)
A structured program
which is federally
funded to encourage
small businesses to
seek and develop
products or processes
which meet
government or private
needs.
Good opportunity
to put federal
funds to use to
improve Eglin
capabilities or to
solve problems.
Products
developed could
have commercial
use. AAC can
authorize
personnel to work
with non-DoD
parties on specific
projects. Service
provided can be
free or reimbursed.
DRX, PK, BC,
AS, FM,
Requesting
Agency
(Customer)
DRX
AAC
Consulting
Agreement
An outside agency
(government,
industry, academia)
can tap into AAC
knowledge or
expertise through a
consulting
arrangement.
AAC can
authorize
personnel to work
with non-DoD
parties on specific
projects. Service
provided can be
free or reimbursed.
DRX, PK,
FM, JA, AS,
Organization
CC (Partner)
DRX
Consulting to
AAC
Organizations
A formal agreement
through which expert
technical information
or advice is passed to
the government
(usually of short
duration and specific
scope).
Permits the
government to
procure expert
assistance to solve
problems. Little
likelihood of use
for AAC
technology
transfer.
PK, FM, JA,
AS, DRX,
Requesting
Agency
(Partner)
PK DRX
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 79
Technology Transfer (T2) Guidance
Table
Mechanisms Description Use Organizations
Affected OPR OCR
Collegial
Interchanges,
Conferences,
Publications,
Symposiums
Every
symposium/technical
conference attended
or article written by or
about AAC is an
opportunity to
describe AAC and its
capabilities to support
technology transfer.
Active
participation in
conferences, etc.,
with a knowledge
of what AAC has
accomplished in
technology
transfer can bring
in additional
opportunities. We
can all be
marketeers.
DRX,PA,
Execution
Agencies
Exec
Agency
License from
AAC
A written agreement
which allows use of a
patent or other
intellectual property
which is owned by
AAC.
Licensing
agreements allow
AAC and
individuals to
receive royalties
for the use of
inventions.
JA, FM, DRX,
AS, Patent
Holder
(Customer)
JA DRX
License to
AAC
Formal agreements
whereby government
pays to use the
patents/intellectual
property of a third
party.
AAC could obtain
the right to use an
invention.
JA, FM, DRX,
AS,
Requesting
Agency
(Seller)
JA DRX
Contract A formal agreement
through which the
government procures
goods or services.
If appropriate,
provisions could
be written into
agreements
requiring
contractors to
transfer
technologies to
private sector.
PK, JA, FM,
AS, DRX,
Requesting
Agency
(Partner)
PK DRX
80 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Technology Transfer (T2) Guidance
Table
Mechanisms Description Use Organizations
Affected OPR OCR
Cost-Shared
Contract
A formal agreement
between the
contractor and
government to share
cost and effort as
specified.
Work must
produce benefit to
both government
and contractor.
Could use to
develop a test
capability.
PK, FM, JA,
AS, DRX,
Requesting
Agency
(Partner)
PK DRX
Grant and
Cooperative
Agreement
A formal agreement
where the government
provides funds or
property to stimulate
research or serve
other public purpose.
Not authorized for
AAC at this time.
May become
authorized in the
future.
PK, FM, JA,
AS, DRX,
Requesting
Agency
(Partner)
PK DRX
Exchange Transfer of personnel
(one-way or swap)
between AAC and
other party. Note:
Several formal
programs exist at AF
level for this same
purpose.
Primary use is to
bring expertise
together
synergistically to
develop or create.
DRX, JA, FM,
HRDC, AS,
Requesting
Agency
(Partner)
DRX
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 81
Chapter 9
MISSIONS AND RESOURCE SCHEDULING
9.1. Introduction. The purpose of this chapter is to acquaint the PE with mission scheduling
procedures.
9.2. Center Scheduling Enterprise (CSE). CSE is used by the 46 TW for the scheduling of all
mission activity requiring the use of Eglin land and water ranges or support resources. CSE
supports resource managers, air/ground range managers, munitions support, mission requesters,
and mission schedulers. Users requiring access to CSE should contact the CSE Helpdesk, 882-
4491, option 4, for assistance.
9.3. Mission Scheduling. Mission requests for any activity using Eglin range areas and
resources will be submitted through CSE. Resources and range areas authorized for use will be
as outlined in the program TD. An early turn-on will be required to schedule test task ground
missions before the TD is signed (see paragraph 9.9). Once the test enters the closeout phase,
missions cannot be scheduled unless the test is reactivated.
9.4. Scheduling Cycle. CSE Mission Requests may be submitted at any time prior to execution
date, but no later than 0600L on the Friday, two weeks prior to the mission execution week.
Missions may be submitted after this time but are considered ―blackboard‖ missions and are
considered only after all other missions have been scheduled. At 1500L, 3 duty days prior to
mission execution, changes will no longer be accepted until after the operations order (Ops
Order) is published at 1600L. Blackboard missions submitted after the Ops Order is published
will require a management emphasis (ME) request if O&M resources are requested.
9.5. Scheduling Priority. Mission requests for trainers preparing for deployment, quick
reaction tests and management emphasis missions will be scheduled before any other mission
requests are considered. Programs that have been identified for allocated range space will be
added to the schedule next. All remaining mission requests will be scheduled in accordance with
the tier group to which they are assigned. If a scheduling conflict occurs between two of these
remaining requests for the same range area or resource, schedulers will manually work with the
affected mission requesters in an effort to resolve conflicts.
9.5.1. Management Emphasis (ME). Any test program utilizing Eglin resources may request
ME. ME is a special request used by programs that must have missions executed as soon as
possible due to, but not limited to, an approaching milestone or Higher Headquarters (HHQ)
direction. Request for ME must be submitted to the 46 TW Commander or his designated
representative for approval. ME requests must be submitted prior to the normal on-time
mission submittal deadline using the AAC Form 773, Special Scheduling Consideration
Request (see Useful Links menu option in the Test Process Tool for link). The ME request
must be endorsed by the requester‘s squadron CC/DO/CV. Additional information regarding
management emphasis is contained in EAFBI 13-204, Eglin Range Mission Scheduling and
Control.
9.6. Late Mission Requests. Missions submitted after the start of the scheduling cycle are
considered to be late and are designated blackboard missions. Blackboard missions will not be
considered for scheduling until all missions requested prior to the start of the scheduling cycle
82 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
have been evaluated and scheduled. Blackboard missions may have ME and may bump already
scheduled missions.
9.7. Mission Cancellation/Withdrawal. If it is determined that a mission is not needed after
the mission request has been submitted, it may be withdrawn or cancelled. Missions may be
withdrawn up to 3 days prior to mission day and prior to the Ops Order printing with no cost
penalty other than the man-hours required for mission scheduling. At 3 days prior to execution
day or later and after the operations order is printed, missions that must be cancelled may incur
additional costs if requested resources cannot be reallocated to other missions. All completed
test, test/task and training missions require submission of a Post Mission Report (PMR) in CSE.
9.8. Early Turn-On:
9.8.1. Test missions of any kind are not to be conducted without a signed Test Directive.
9.8.2. The early turn-on is used to schedule resources required to conduct test task ground
missions that need to be conducted prior to the test directive being signed. It cannot be used
for flying missions. The primary purpose of the early turn-on is to allow specific requested
tasks to be accomplished in the test planning phase that are required to provide preliminary
information for test item design, long lead test preparation, and as part of the test directive
process. Examples of task missions that can be completed under the early turn-on concept
include range/facility or target preparation, transportation/modification of munitions/aircraft,
ground checkout of range/aircraft instrumentation, flight clearance sign-off, munitions
loading verification, aircraft fit/function checks, aircraft modification sign-off, and
aircraft/other fit checks to obtain preliminary test item design information for the weapon
contractors.
9.8.3. The PE may request early turn-on if the type activity qualifies as described above.
The procedure is as follows:
9.8.3.1. The TE contacts the PE with the requirement for early turn-on.
9.8.3.2. The PE assesses the availability of funds and status of the TD relative to the
signature date.
9.8.3.3. The PE forwards the request for Squadron approval, (CC, DO, or CA).
9.8.3.4. If approved at the Squadron, the information is forwarded to the 46
RANMS/DOS providing the information listed in Figure 9-1.
9.8.3.5. The 46 RANMS/DOS determines if the activity qualifies for early turn-on, if so,
seeks approval from the 46 TW Commander or his/her designated representative and
updates CSE.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 83
Figure 9.1. Checklist for Early Turn-On
Title of Test:
Priority
Date TD to be Signed:
Date of Task Mission Submittal:
Date Task Mission to be Conducted:
Funds Available:
Test Engineer:
Reason for request:
84 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Chapter 10
SAFETY
10.1. Introduction. All operations at AAC conducted under a 46 TW test directive (TD) will
undergo a safety review in accordance with AACI 91-201, Test Safety Review Process, 30 Oct
2002, that will result in a test/test point risk level assessment of either low, medium, or high.
The focal point within the Safety Office for this safety review is Range Safety (AAC/SEU). This
organization should be one of the first organizations contacted by the PE after receiving a new or
potential test, as some actions may require extremely long lead times. Brief descriptions of the
functional areas available within the Safety Office are shown in the following paragraphs.
10.2. Range Safety (AAC/SEU):
10.2.1. General Responsibilities. The primary objective of the Range Safety Program is to
minimize the risk to life and property from the test and training operations being conducted
without unduly restricting range users in the accomplishment of their tests. This is usually
the first organization in AAC Safety to review a new or potential test or training activity.
Range Safety will engage and coordinate with other internal specialized safety personnel as
required. The assigned Range Safety engineer will work the safety solutions in conjunction
with the Test Engineer and other team members for the test/training operation, will schedule
and chair a Risk Management Board (RMB), and will prepare the Safety Appendix for
inclusion in the final TD. The PE will ensure that the Safety Office has access to pertinent
data such as test item description, aircraft type/configurations, test conditions, scope of effort,
and any known environmental issues. Discussions of the planning factors listed in Figure
13.1, Planning Factors, will provide most of the necessary data. Range Safety can be reached
at 882-4000.
10.2.2. Depending on the type of test, the analysis done by Range Safety engineers may
include impact safety footprints, casualty expectations, electromagnetic radiation hazards,
calculation of bomb fragmentation hazard distances, blast overpressures, ballistics of flight
termination generated debris, and real-time safety displays for the Central Control Facility.
This engineering analysis will translate into test safety requirements, which will be defined in
the Test Directive (TD) Safety Appendix (SA). Evacuation areas, personnel or equipment
protection criteria, real-time displays, etc., are examples of the requirements.
10.2.3. Flight Termination Systems (FTS). Some weapons systems tested on the range
require an FTS for risk mitigation. These weapons even under failed conditions have the
performance capability to impact outside the test range boundaries. To negate this hazard, a
flight safety system is installed onboard the test vehicle that, when commanded from the
ground, will immediately terminate the vehicle‘s flight before it leaves the designated test
airspace. Flight termination may be affected by an onboard explosive device which cuts the
wings or by aerodynamic means causing the vehicle to roll or tumble. Because an FTS is a
―must work‖ device, a great deal of engineering design, design review, component
qualification testing, acceptance testing and certification testing is required by the range.
FTS components are tested to anticipated (plus margins) flight conditions including
vibration, temperature, shock, humidity, altitude, and EMI/EMC to ensure their reliability.
The Range Safety Offices (AAC, NAVAIR, WSMR, PMRF, UTTR, 45th
and 30th
Space
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 85
Wings, AFFTC, AEDC, YPG, RTS, ATC, NASA Wallops) under the auspices of the Range
Commanders Council, have published RCC 319-07, Flight Termination Systems
Commonality Standard, (available at AAC/SEU), which defines common range FTS design,
testing and documentation criteria. An FTS is a long lead-time item and is normally
designed, tested, and approved by the Range Safety engineers during the system acquisition
cycle prior to Test Wing involvement.
10.2.4. Real-Time Safety Support at the Central Control Facility (CCF). Range Safety
engineers provide real-time, on-site support for many tests performing Range Safety Officer
(RSO) and/or Range Destruct Officer (RDO) functions as required by AFI 13-212 (Change
1), Range Planning and Operations. Complex airborne tests or any flight test of a vehicle
with an FTS are supported by Range Safety engineers at the CCF. They will monitor
mission progress, test area clearance, issue clear-to-arm, clear-to-fire calls, etc. For FTS-
equipped systems, the Range Safety engineer will operate the command destruct panel and
send the flight terminate command if the vehicle violates safety criteria displayed on the
control monitors and/or becomes a dangerous item.
10.2.5. Risk Management Board (RMB). The Operational Risk Management (ORM)-based
hazard identification and mitigation performed by AAC Range Safety during the test
approval process is the RMB. An RMB will be convened for all tests conducted under 46
TW test directives and will designate an appropriate risk level for tests or test points; an
informal RMB may be conducted when deemed appropriate by both AAC Safety and 46 Test
Wing personnel. Range Safety is responsible for scheduling and conducting the RMB where
potential hazards are identified, TE-developed Test Hazard Analysis Worksheets (THAWs)
are discussed, possible risk reduction procedures/corrective actions are formulated, and the
risk level is identified. Information obtained from the RMB is used to prepare the Safety
Appendix, which is required before the Airborne Test Review and Safety Board (ATR/SB)
can be conducted. RMB process and procedures are documented in AACI 91-201. In
general, RMB membership consists of the test engineer, test aircrew (for flying tests), Flight
Safety, Weapons Safety, and Range Safety. TE and PE attendance at the RMB is mandatory,
and the TE will brief the test to the board. Supporting personnel with expertise from SEEK
EAGLE, EOD, bioenvironmental engineering, aircraft maintenance, program office, etc.,
may also sit on the RMB. Tests which the RMB considers to be ―medium risk‖ have to be
approved by 46 TW/CC. Those deemed to be ―high risk‖ must be approved by AAC/CC.
Details of the safety notification and approval requirements can be found in AACI 91-201,
AAC Test Safety Review Process.
10.2.5.1. Risk Levels. Risk level definitions are as follows:
10.2.5.1.1. Low Risk. Tests or activities that present no greater risk than that
associated with normal operations. Routine supervision is appropriate.
10.2.5.1.2. Medium Risk. Tests or activities that present a greater risk to personnel,
equipment and/or property than normal operations and that require more than routine
supervision.
10.2.5.1.3. High Risk. Tests or activities that present a significant risk to personnel,
equipment and/or property even after all precautionary measures have been taken.
86 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
10.2.5.2. Schedule. The RMB will be scheduled within approximately seven days after
the RTO or PTO has completed the technical evaluation of the Method of Test or
Concept of Operations and delivered these documents to AAC Range Safety. The RMB
should be held as late in the planning cycle as possible. Any changes in the Method of
Test after the RMB has been completed will result in the requirement to re-accomplish
the Test Safety Review Process and may result in another RMB and/or ATR/SB. After
the RMB, Range Safety will submit through Livelink the completed Safety Appendix to
the PE within approximately eight days.
10.2.6. Airborne Test Review/Safety Board (ATR/SB). The ATR/SB is established to
provide a management level review of airborne test safety. The ATR/SB is the forum where
control decisions are made and the residual risk level identified at the RMB is accepted,
rejected, minimized further or elevated to a higher authority for a decision. This review is
accomplished prior to beginning a flight test program by a board of members highly qualified
in their respective fields. The ATR/SB approves a flight test or recommends approval only
when all hazards have been reviewed, satisfactory planning and analysis have been
conducted, and procedures have been established to allow safe accomplishment of the test.
The ATR/SB does not provide airworthiness certification, external store flight clearances,
design safety certification, or test safety criteria (for example, impact footprints). These
certifications must be obtained from appropriate sources and reviewed and approved at the
RMB, which occurs prior to conducting the ATR/SB. The ATR/SB is authorized to establish
additional test limitations or restrictions when required. For 46 TG tests, the ATR/SB is
referred to as a Safety Review Board (SRB) and is conducted for medium/high risk ground
tests as well as all flight tests. The term ATR/SB includes the 46 TG's SRB as well. PE and
TE attendance at the ATR/SB is mandatory. The TE will brief the test to the board.
10.2.6.1. Board Structure.
10.2.6.1.1. The ATR/SB members are appointed by the 46 TW/CC or the 46 TG/CC.
The 46OG/CC is the ATR/SB president. In his absence, a designated alternate, who
must be a rated officer, must be present and will preside at ATR/SB meetings. At
least one AAC/SE representative, a recorder and all available members will also
attend each meeting. The ATR/SB president can direct attendance by particular
members as circumstances dictate.
10.2.6.1. 2 The ATR/SB (SRB) at Holloman AFB is chaired by the 46 TG/CC or a
designated alternate. Board members at Holloman AFB will include the 46 TG/CC or
46TG/CD, the Squadron Commander, Safety Officer (46 TG/SE), 49th Fighter Wing
(ACC) representative, a pilot current in the test aircraft, and a recorder. A quorum
consists of five members to include the president or designated alternate, the recorder, 46
TG/QA and a 46 TG/SE representative.
10.2.7. Range Safety Mishap Reporting. Any unusual occurrence, breach of safety, or
hazardous condition will be immediately reported by telephone to the Eglin Command Post
by the test director or other person having such knowledge. That person will send AAC/SE a
written report within 24 hours for appropriate action.
10.3. Systems Safety (AAC/SES):
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 87
10.3.1. General Responsibilities. The focus of Systems Safety is to ensure that conventional
air munitions and other AAC programs developed, tested, and employed by the USAF
possess adequate design safety throughout the life-cycle. Systems Safety engineers reduce
risks by identifying hazards, conducting detailed independent safety analyses and studies,
developing safety performance test and related requirements, and providing effective design
safety recommendations for elimination or control of these hazards with minimum
operational restrictions placed on the users. Systems Safety can be contacted at 882-4157.
The main areas where PEs interface with Systems Safety are described below.
10.3.2. USAF Nonnuclear Munitions Safety Board. Obtaining safety approval or
certification recommendation is a prerequisite for USAF conventional munitions and/or
weapons to enter flight testing with live munitions and/or operational service. The USAF
Nonnuclear Munitions Safety Board (NNMSB) is the reviewing authority and System Safety
Group chartered to approve flight testing with live uncertified munitions and recommend
safety certifications for air munitions and explosive devices entering developmental test
and/or the operational inventory (ref. AFI 91-205, Nonnuclear Munitions Safety Board).
Systems Safety directly supports this mission by providing engineering technical support
services to the NNMSB and performing independent safety assessments and studies for AAC
Acquisition Wing, 46 Test Wing, and other acquisition agencies.
10.3.3. T-2 Aircraft Modification Program. The Systems Safety role is specified in AFMCI
21-126, Temporary 2 (T2) Modification of Aerospace Vehicles. Systems Safety evaluates
and reviews engineering changes, identifies hazards, participates in design reviews, and
advises Configuration Control Board members to ensure design safety of test hardware.
Systems Safety assistance may include performing selected system safety analyses such as a
preliminary hazard analysis, compliance with Air Worthiness Certification, subsystem
compatibility, and electrical loads analysis. Systems Safety is also a core member of the 46
OG Configuration Control Board.
10.3.4. Technical Data for Munitions. Systems Safety reviews, processes, and approves
technical data for munitions (TDM) for which no Technical Order exists to ensure safe and
proper receipt, inspection, packaging and storage for munitions/explosive devices. TDMs are
valid for the Eglin complex and required by AACI 21-202, Munitions Technical Data, for
new or modified, other services, and FMS/NATO items to be tested at the Eglin Complex.
AACI 21-202 specifies content and format for TDMs. The Livelink web site is used to
electronically process, coordinate and file/retrieve TDMs.
10.3.5. Hazard Classifications for Munitions and Explosive Devices. Public law (49 CFR)
and DoD Policy (TO 11A-1-47) requires that before any weapon, munition, or explosive
device can be transported across US highways or transported and stored overseas (NATO), it
must be assigned an appropriate hazard classification (HC). There are two types of HCs as
follows: (1) Interim Hazard Classification (IHC), and (2) Final Hazard Classification (FHC).
IHCs are typically assigned for new or modified emerging weapons development, quick
reaction, and test programs and are valid for 1 year. Systems Safety has been delegated
authority from DOT to process and issue IHCs, thereby ensuring statutory compliance (49
CFR) for the safe transport/storage of weapons, munitions, and explosive devices via
commercial modes. In addition AAC/SES can assist the PEs in processing the request for an
FHC, reviewing related Test Plans and providing guidance pursuant to obtaining FHC under
UN/STANAG requirements.
88 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
10.4. Weapons Safety (AAC/SEW):
10.4.1. General Responsibilities. Weapons Safety provides support on all matters pertaining
to explosives, missiles, directed energy weapons, and nuclear safety. The technicians in this
office coordinate on all munitions technical data packages as well as locally developed
procedures for EOD response; munitions buildup, modification, disassembly, and loading.
They also approve site plans for explosive storage and weapon buildup locations, investigate
and report explosive mishaps involving AAC activities, and assist tenant units according to
their host-tenant support agreements. These are the main areas that may require PE contact
with Weapons Safety.
10.4.2. Support of Weapon Development. Because the AAC mission revolves around
development of new weapons, the Weapons Safety technicians are actively engaged in many
areas which may be outside the normal base Weapons Safety functions. New weapons and
foreign items can require development of unique technical data to address everything from
initial receipt and storage to final loading on an aircraft. EOD procedures include such things
as the recovery of malfunctioned test items, disposal of explosive residue, and safing of hung
ordnance on test aircraft. Weapons Safety also provides on-site safety support for ground
tests using live ordnance.
10.4.3. Explosive Sitting and Facility Plans. PEs should coordinate with AAC/SEW on all
site and facility plans for explosives facilities or proposed non-explosives facilities to ensure
integrity of existing safety clear zones. PEs should also provide AF Forms 332 and one copy
of the environmental analysis documentation to AAC/SEW for review and approval.
AAC/SEW will evaluate and coordinate all requests for waivers, deviations, and exemptions
to explosives safety criteria prior to submission to higher headquarters.
10.4.4. Mishap Investigations. AAC/SEW conducts investigations of mishaps involving
explosives, missiles, directed energy weapons or nuclear weapons. Mishaps must be
investigated and the resulting data analyzed to determine cause factors. Commanders of
organizations concerned will assist with the investigation by furnishing technically qualified
personnel to assist AAC/SEW. In the event of a weapons safety mishap, the supervisor, test
director, crew chief, senior military member, or USAF employee present will immediately
contact 96 ABW/XPO. If a mishap involves a tenant organization, it will be reported
according to host/tenant or inter-service support agreements and as prescribed in their
command directives. AAC/SE will determine the category of each mishap. Weapons Safety
can be contacted at 882-2540, ext 3.
10.5. Flight Safety (AAC/SEF):
10.5.1. General Responsibilities. The airborne testing of armament, munitions, and
associated electronic equipment at Eglin involves a wide range of parameters. There are old
and new delivery vehicles, high-and low-speed deliveries at various altitudes over both water
and land ranges. Flight Safety Officers (FSO) at AAC help the flying units meet the strictest
safety standards and highest degree of professionalism to safely conduct flight test missions
in the most demanding environments.
10.5.2. Support of Test Planning. FSOs accomplish their Flight Safety responsibilities
through active participation in the test planning cycle. FSOs are always members of the
RMB whenever flight testing is involved. They will review the test matrix to ensure the
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 89
flight maneuvers, profiles, etc., do not exceed aircraft or aircrew capabilities. As a member
of the RMB, the FSO acts as a link between Air Force-wide Flight Safety issues and specific
test safety issues; e.g., could this flight test data point potentially cause the aircraft to enter a
condition that has been identified as a fleet-wide problem?
10.5.3. Mishap Prevention. AAC/SEF reviews all TDs which involve flying and provides
appropriate flight safety-related inputs to safety annexes; monitors projects in progress;
participates in RMBs; attends ATR/SB; and reviews and signs off required aircraft
modifications.
10.5.4. Flight Safety Program. AAC/SEF maintains a proactive Flight Safety program
through material deficiency reports, mishap investigations, mishap reporting, Flight Safety
education, Flight Safety inspections, and inspection/surveillance of airfields and navigational
and support facilities.
10.5.5. PE Responsibilities. PEs should notify AAC/SEF anytime they have knowledge of
or experience any unusual occurrence or test failure that could adversely affect Flight Safety.
Flight Safety can be contacted at 882-2540, ext 2.
10.6. Ground Safety (AAC/SEG):
10.6.1. General Responsibilities. Ground Safety‘s main function is industrial safety so most
PEs will interface with them where there are test issues involving OSHA, ANSI, or AFOSH
standards or National Electrical Code issues. Ground Safety will be able to assist with safety
issues such as fall protection, confined spaces, machine guarding, heavy equipment
operation, transportation, marine activities, Personnel Protective Equipment (PPE), storage,
and job safety analysis.
10.6.2. Ground Mishaps. Investigating and reporting all ground mishaps is one of the many
functions for which Ground Safety is responsible. Investigation determines causes and takes
steps to prevent a mishap from occurring again. Safety mishap investigations have priority
over all related investigations until relieved by the AAC Commander.
10.6.3. Non-test-Related Responsibilities. Ground Safety is active in many other areas not
directly related to testing. Recreational safety programs, facilities inspections, motorcycle
driver training courses, and safety education programs are just a few of the services offered
by technicians in Ground Safety. Ground Safety can be contacted at 882-2540, ext 4.
90 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Chapter 11
TECHNICAL SUPPORT
11.1. Introduction
11.1.1. The purpose of this chapter is to provide the PE with guidance and information
concerning technical support for a test program. Specifically, it defines what is included in
the category of technical support, describes the process and responsibilities whereby
technical requirements are defined and documented, alerts the PE to items that require a long
lead time, discusses the technical support organization, and describes reference materials that
contain details concerning 46 TW capabilities.
11.1.2. Technical support includes all the test ranges, facilities, and instrumentation
necessary to collect and reduce test data. This includes ground and airborne instrumentation,
range engineering, range O&M, computer services support, climatic conditioning,
photographic services, and weather support.
11.2. Technical Support Organization:
11.2.1. 46th Range Group (46 RANG). 46 RANG (882-4667) is the focal point for all
technical planning. It is responsible for operating and maintaining all of the range testing
facilities and systems on Eglin Air Force Base and provides technical support for testing
tailored to meet each customer's requirements. 46 RANG engineers issue tasking and
technical direction to the various support agencies based upon the requirements defined
during the test planning process.
11.2.1.1. 46th Range Support Squadron (46 RANSS): 46 RANSS, 882-1924, provides
for the modernization, configuration control, and upgrade of existing range facilities and
the acquisition of new range facilities and test environments for munitions, electronics,
and C4ISR testing, administers the range, and the photographic laboratory O&M
contracts. Areas of responsibility are the land and water ranges and their associated
instrumentation (cameras/tracking radars/EO and IR/weather), voice and data
transmission facilities, threat radar systems, electronic systems design and development,
and facilities and targets engineering. Each test area/site, instrumentation system, or
functional area has an engineer assigned responsibility.
11.2.1.1.1. Targets and Facilities Flight (TSRF): Provides an in-house, test support,
engineering design and acquisition capability for Fixed Targets, Mobile Surface
Targets, Remote Control Surface Targets, and Range Facilities.
11.2.1.1.2. Range Systems Flight (TSRS): Is the focal point for overall facility and
instrumentation systems status, including operational capabilities, system
configurations, and existing and planned modifications. Functional areas and specific
responsibilities include:
11.2.1.1.2.1. TSRSL: Land ranges
11.2.1.1.2.2. TSRST: Time-Space-Position Information and data communications
systems for ASTE and MSTTE.
11.2.1.1.2.3. TSRSR: Open-air threat radar systems
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 91
11.2.1.1.3. O&M Contractor Management Flight (TSRM): Manages the Multimedia
Center and other range support contracts. Specific responsibilities include:
11.2.1.1.3.1. The photographic laboratory provides a full range of photographic
and video services primarily for the purpose of test documentation.
11.2.1.1.3.2. The range O&M contractor is responsible for O&M of all 46 TW
ranges and range instrumentation resources and provides support in response to
scheduled missions or contract task documents generated by the
range/instrumentation engineers or technical support engineers.
11.2.1.2. 846th Test Support Squadron (846 TSS). The 846 TSS, 882-4501, perform
aerospace vehicle T-2 modification instrumentation installations required to collect and
telemeter flight test data for munitions and aircraft avionics evaluations. Responsibilities
also include configuration management for instrumentation systems installed in 46 TW
test aircraft. This squadron is responsible for aircraft instrumentation pods and cameras
and provides preflight services for installed aircraft instrumentation in preparation for test
missions. Support includes instrumentation engineering design, acquisition, fabrication,
installation, maintenance, flight test support (both locally and TDY), configuration
management of T-2 records, and cost/schedule tracking and reporting. An engineer is
assigned to work each individual test aircraft or system.
11.2.1.2.1. Systems Engineering Flight, (846 TSS/RNME): Provides systems
engineering support to design, develop, and procure T-2 modification installed
airborne instrumentation systems, both internal aircraft mounted and instrumented
pods; perform T-2 modification installation support and post modification calibration,
checkout, and data validation; and provide pre/post flight instrumentation support for
test missions both locally and at TDY locations.
11.2.1.2.2. Modification Design Flight (846 TSS/RNMD): Conducts T-2
modification design, analysis, fabrication & installation support; provides electrical
and mechanical installation design, and documentation of aerospace vehicle T-2
modifications. Capabilities include:
11.2.1.2.2.1. Mechanical and electrical design using mechanical and electrical
computer aided design software.
11.2.1.2.2.2. Structural, vibration, and thermal analysis using finite element
analysis software.
11.2.1.2.3. Modification Installation Flight (846 TSS/RNMS): Supports the
installation of aerospace vehicle T-2 modifications including the electrical wiring and
instrumentation equipment mounting fixtures. Capabilities include:
11.2.1.2.3.1. Design, fabrication and installation of aircraft wire bundles and
small electronic control and signal conditioning boxes necessary to collect
selected flight test data.
11.2.1.2.3.2. Structural fabrication. Fabrication shops include extensive sheet
metal, machine shop, fiberglass and paint capabilities.
11.2.1.2.3.3. Aircraft modification. Facilities include 45,000 square feet of
hangar space capable of housing aircraft with a vertical height of 56 feet 10
92 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
inches. An additional 45,000 square feet is available on a case by case basis.
11.2.1.2.4. Flightline Support Flight (846 TSS/RNMF): TSIF provides pre-mission
test aircraft configuration and performs limited verification of aircraft instrumentation
data prior to the test mission. Capabilities include:
11.2.1.2.4.1. Configuring test aircraft instrumentation equipment suite to record
and/or telemeter instrumentation data set for conduct of missions, both locally and
TDY.
11.2.1.2.4.2. Maintenance and repair of instrumentation equipment to support
flight test missions.
11.2.1.2.4.3. Maintenance of T-2 modification instrumentation installations on 46
TW and 53rd Wing test aircraft.
11.2.1.2.5. Specialized Support Section (846 TSS/RNMFC): Conducts
instrumentation support scheduling & pre-mission data validation. 846 TSS/TSIFC
schedules aircraft instrumentation preflight and post-flight support necessary to
configure instrumentation and validate flight test data with a quick-look ground
facility prior to test missions. Maintain configuration control management records of
aerospace vehicle T-2 modifications, and also provide GPS pod support. Capabilities
include:
11.2.1.2.5.1. Scheduling aircraft instrumentation preflight.
11.2.1.2.5.2. Operation of data (telemetry, data and video tapes) quick-look
facility to verify proper aircraft instrumentation configuration.
11.2.1.2.5.3. Calibration and maintenance of GPS pods for carriage on test
aircraft.
11.2.1.2.5.4. Instrumentation quick-look van for use on Eglin remote areas or
TDY locations.
11.2.1.2.6. Modification Management Support (846 TSS/RNM TAMS): Provides
cost/schedule reporting and analysis on T-2 modification programs, and maintains
copy of all T-2 modification documentation.
11.2.1.3. 782nd Test Squadron (782 TS). 782 TS, 882-4670, develops and maintains
engineering expertise, facilities, equipment, and instrumentation systems to conduct
munitions and avionics systems testing in a multi-spectral simulation environment, as
well as integrated testing of electronic combat and armament systems installed on
weapons platforms and electronic combat testing using hardware-in-the-loop simulators.
It is responsible for the Guided Weapons Evaluation Facility (GWEF), Joint Preflight
Integration of Munitions and Electronic Systems (J-PRIMES), McKinley Climatic Lab
(MCL), and a suite of ground and airborne instrumentation that measures visible, laser,
IR, ultraviolet, and millimeter-wave frequencies.
11.2.1.3.1. Guided Weapons Test Flight (782 TS/RNWGH): Conducts live, virtual,
and constructive tests of air armaments via digital and hardware-in-the loop (HITL)
simulation. Products and services include:
11.2.1.3.1.1. Parametric measurements (facility, field, and flight)
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 93
11.2.1.3.1.2. Digital and hardware-in-the-loop (HITL) simulation testing
11.2.1.3.1.3. Counter-countermeasure (CCM) testing
11.2.1.3.1.4. Performance characterization analysis (PCA)
11.2.1.3.1.5. Aircraft self protection
11.2.1.3.2. Seekers & Sensors Test Flight (782 TS/RNWI): Provides design,
development, and operation of airborne and ground electro-optical instrumentation
systems. Capabilities include:
11.2.1.3.2.1. Ultraviolet, visible, infrared, and laser signature measurements of
surface and airborne targets, and targets in background including target
expendables.
11.2.1.3.2.2. Captive carry operation and test of air-to-air and surface-to-air
domestic and threat missile seeker guidance and control units operation in real
and electronic combat (EC) environments.
11.2.1.3.2.3. Quick look and field data reduction and analysis of all collected
signature data
11.2.1.3.3. Guided Weapons Test Flight, Software Systems Section (782
TS/RNWGS): Generates the targets and test environments needed to evaluate
systems utilizing visible, infrared, imaging infrared, laser, radar, and midcourse
seekers and sensors. Promising weapon system ideas/concepts can be tested,
analyzed, and improved as a precursor to initial field/flight testing. Live fire results
and anomalies be can replicated for detailed technical investigation and confirmation
of resolution
11.2.1.3.4. Installed Systems Test Flight, Integrated Systems Test Section (782
TS/RNWPS). 782 TS/RNWPS develops and assesses innovative concepts and
establishes an integrated test team aimed at providing critical electromagnetic
environmental effects (E3) testing to meet present and future military and commercial
needs. The J-PRIMES anechoic chamber, as an installed systems test facility (ISTF),
provides testing of air-to-air and air-to-surface munitions and electronics systems on
full-scale aircraft and land vehicles prior to open air testing. Through simulation and
modeling, vast amounts of performance data can be obtained at a fraction of the time
and cost of conventional flight test programs alone.
11.2.1.3.5. Installed Systems Test Flight, Climatic Lab Section (782 TS/RNWPC).
782 TS/RNWPC has the capability to create any climatic environment in the world.
McKinley Lab has a number of climatic chambers to insure weapon systems can be
tested under extreme environmental conditions. The capabilities of the McKinley
Climatic Laboratory help engineers ensure maximum reliability and operational
capability can be engineered for our ever-more-complex weapon systems.
11.2.1.4. 46th Test Support Squadron (46 TSS): 46 TSS (882-3182), provides in-house
design, development, fabrication and integration of specialized instrumentation systems
for command, control and intelligence (C2I) and munitions tests. These include airborne
systems, Time Space Position Information (TSPI), Target Control, Global Positioning
94 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Systems (GPS), telemetry, antenna design, and ground instrumentation upgrades to range
test facilities. Consulting services in these areas are also provided.
11.2.1.4.1. Electronic Design Flight (46 TSS/TSDE): The 46 TSS/TSDE focus of
expertise is in analog and digital circuit design, programmable logic devices, real-
time embedded firmware, telemetry systems, antenna design, electronic
miniaturization, GPS applications, aircraft and weapon instrumentation.
11.2.1.4.2. Systems Integration Flight (46 TSS/TSDS): Provides technical
consultation, design, development, fabrication, and system integration for the 46 TW
and other DOD customers. Specific areas of expertise include GPS and other TSPI
systems, drone control systems and RF data links.
11.2.1.5. 46th Test System Squadron (46 TSSQ). 46 TSSQ (882-7037) designs,
develops, and acquires new test instrumentation to equip the 46th Range Group (46
RANG). Provides 46 RANG with program management expertise and guidance in the
execution of T&E and R&D programs, and provides engineering and technical resources
to seek and develop new business relationships and opportunities. It is responsible for
oversight and guidance of 46 RANG investment planning and prioritization process. 46
TSSQ also provides the 46 RANG with specialized acquisition management support on
contracts, delivery orders, acquisition plans and source selections, and with expert
financial guidance and service on all aspects of budget execution.
11.2.2. 46th RANG Technical Support Services (46 RNCS). 46 RNCS provides a full range
of computer support for the 46 TW test mission. These services include scientific computer
systems operation and management, real-time range control and support, test design, data
communications, data reduction, and data analysis. Personnel within this unit possess
recognized expertise in all areas of computer science and mathematical services. A broad
spectrum of hardware is available with computing capability ranging from the personal
computer to supercomputers.
11.3. Technical Planning. The responsibility for planning, coordinating, and implementing the
technical support required for a test program, is a joint responsibility of the TEO and the
Technical Support Team. The PE, TE, and technical support staff work closely from the
inception of the test program to define the technical needs and provide the implementation
instructions to satisfy those needs. Upon contact by the PE, or by direct request in the case of
advanced planning, one of the technical support engineers will be designated as the Technical
Support Engineer (TSE) to the effort. This individual, who is highly knowledgeable of 46 TW
technical capabilities, will attend all planning meetings and ensure that representatives from all
the required supporting agencies and organizations also attend.
11.3.1. The technical requirements of the test program are derived from many different
sources; the Program Introduction Document (PID), test request, meetings with the test
customer, briefings, from the Method of Test (MOT) Appendix, and so forth. The PE, as
focal point for test planning, will often receive these requirements directly and should
immediately pass them to the technical support engineer for action. The TSE examines the
requirements and determines how to satisfy these needs through separate meetings and
conversations with support agencies, use of technical reference materials, and from personal
knowledge based upon experience.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 95
11.3.2. Most range support required for any test conducted at Eglin can be provided by the
Range O&M contractor. Such support includes instrumentation, test setup, target
construction, etc. The policy is to use the Eglin Range O&M contractor for such services to
the maximum extent possible. By doing so, we will be able to keep the services available for
all customers and minimize the cost of such services. In addition, we will reduce the
probability of creating an environmental problem, incurring a liability, or having a safety
incident since the Range O&M contractor is familiar with the range and 46 TW operating
policies. If a customer desires to obtain any service normally provided by the Range O&M
contractor from another source, the PE should discourage it and try to get an agreement to
use the Range O&M Contractor provided services. If an agreement cannot be reached, the
PE is to get 46 OG/CA approval prior to allowing the services to be provided by another
source.
11.3.3. The culmination of this planning effort is the generation of implementing directives.
These can be either a Technical Support Appendix (TSA) or, where long-range planning is
necessary, technical support requirement tasks directed to one of the support agencies.
11.3.4. Technical Support Appendix. This document, which becomes part of the TD, is
prepared by the TSE. In many cases coordination on the MOT can take the place of TSA
generation and coordination. 46th RANSS/TD or 846TS/TD will work with PE and or TE to
determine if TSA generation or MOT coordination will be required. If TSA is required, the
TSAs define and document all test support requirements and responsibilities for ground and
airborne instrumentation, range facilities, simulation systems, environmental conditioning,
photography, meteorological support, Frequency Control and Analysis (FCA) support, and
data reduction and processing, and it specifies data classification requirements. The TSA is
generally prepared and coordinated in the latter stages of the planning cycle, usually within 2
weeks after receipt of the draft TD containing the final draft MOT.
11.3.5. Another form of implementing direction may be required when long-range actions
are necessary well in advance of the formal test documentation or when unusual
requirements exist.
11.3.6. Long-Range Technical Support Planning and Tasking:
11.3.6.1. Tasking. Often in a test program, there are technical requirements that may be
beyond the current capabilities of the 46 TW test support structure or that may require
long-range activities to achieve the required capability. In this case, special task
documents are prepared by the technical support engineer to task specific organizations
and to provide technical direction. In some instances, requirements may be established
well in advance of a test program and may require significant expenditure of funds to
achieve an improved or upgraded capability for the 46 TW test range.
11.3.6.1.1. Tasking prepared by the TSE takes several forms. The first are letters to
the appropriate 46 RANG squadrons or appropriate support agencies called technical
support requests, which define the requirement, provide technical direction, and
authorize the expenditure of test project funds (with the PE‘s approval) for the
required manpower and equipment.
11.3.6.1.2. The second category of tasking is formal contract tasks provided to the
range O&M contractor. These are necessary when preparation effort is required in
96 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
advance of scheduled missions, when new equipment is to be acquired and must be
operated and maintained, or when there are other support requirements that are not
included in the existing range O&M contractor statement of work (SOW). These
O&M contractor tasks are prepared by the TSE or by the appropriate engineer in the
46 RANG.
11.3.6.1.3. The PE should be cognizant of the types of activities that require long
lead-time planning and who is responsible for each activity. However, the PE should
rely on his TSE for implementation and tasking.
11.3.6.2. Aircraft Instrumentation Planning. The fleet of aircraft available in 46 TW is
highly instrumented to acquire flight test data from aircraft systems and from installed
test hardware or software. Frequently, a new test program will require additions or
changes to the onboard aircraft instrumentation systems to acquire specialized test data.
These changes can be electronic, mechanical, and/or software. Each individual test
aircraft has an assigned instrumentation engineer located in the Systems Engineering
Flight of 846 TSS who is responsible for all actions relating to that aircraft. This
individual responds to tasking from the technical support engineer and to AFMC Form
244, T-2 Modification Configuration Control Board Directive, submitted by the TE. The
PE must be aware that the process of planning for, procuring, and installing new aircraft
instrumentation can be an extremely lengthy process, taking up to several years.
11.3.6.3. Data Reduction and Display Software Planning. Often a test program in
planning will generate requirements for new computer software for the real-time display
of data in the Central Control Facility (CCF) or for the post-mission reduction and
merging of test data. This usually occurs when the item or system undergoing testing has
not previously been tested at 46 TW or when there are some new data parameters that
need to be examined for performance evaluation or anomaly investigation, and none of
the existing software programs meet these needs. Each test project is assigned a test
support manager within 46 RNCS who has overall responsibility for support and who
responds to tasking from the technical support engineer. Often many separate planning
meetings are held to discuss data and software issues. It is important that new software
requirements be defined early in the planning process. Depending upon the existing
workload and complexity of the software, development can take from 6 months to 1 year
after the requirements have been defined.
11.3.6.4. Range Facilities and Instrumentation Planning. Most test programs will make
use of the existing land and water ranges and instrumentation without any modifications.
Other tests, by their very nature, may require extensive preparation. This may include
modification of existing instrumentation systems, reconfiguration of an existing range,
providing specialized power, establishment of communications, minor range
construction, and so forth. An example of this might be a project that needs to establish a
test setup on an existing test range because of that range‘s unique physical characteristics.
This may result in requirements for clearing and leveling, constructing roads and
instrumentation pads, running commercial power, establishing communications,
arranging a geodetic survey, and some minor construction. Another example could be
the need to modify a tracking camera mount to accommodate a new and larger camera.
A third example may be the need to extract and record a new data parameter from a threat
radar simulator. The time required to work these issues will vary greatly. The important
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 97
point is to identify these requirements to 46 RANG as early as possible. They will
accomplish the necessary planning and issue tasking to the appropriate squadrons.
11.3.6.5. Target Planning. Included in this category are items such as buildings on the
range that are used for weapon aiming/scoring or for weapon effectiveness testing,
concrete blocks/slabs/runway sections used for weapon penetration and effectiveness
testing, vehicles (wheeled and tracked) and aircraft (excluding aerial targets) used for
signature measurements and weapon effectiveness testing. These requirements have
varying degrees of long lead time. Some may require contractual action for construction.
Vehicle and aircraft targets may need to be acquired from other commands or other
services. These requirements must be made known to the 46 RANG at the earliest
possible time to ensure that planning and acquisition are complete so as not to delay the
testing program. The 46 RANSS Targets and Threats Flight is responsible for acquiring
targets.
11.4. Reference Materials:
11.4.1. Technical Facilities Manuals. A three-volume set of Technical Facilities Manuals
are available from the 46 RANSS. Volume I describes the range instrumentation systems
and technical support facilities available to support the 46 TW test mission. Volume II
describes each land and water test area, its uses, features, and capabilities in terms of
equipment, instrumentation, targets, buildings, power, etc. Volume III is a classified
document that provides a detailed description of the threat radar systems and instrumentation
that are a part of the Eglin Multi-Spectral Test and Training Environment (MSTTE).
98 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Chapter 12
FREQUENCY AUTHORIZATIONS
12.1. Introduction. The purpose of this chapter is to provide the PE with guidance and
information concerning frequency management/authorizations in support of 46 TW test/training
programs.
12.2. Frequency Management. The Eglin Range Spectrum Manager (ERSM), 882-4416, is
responsible for the administration of the frequency management program for Eglin AFB. An
additional tasking of the office is to act as the DoD Gulf Area Frequency Coordinator (GAFC).
The ERSM coordinates on all DoD frequency proposals within a 200-nautical mile radius of the
Eglin range. The purpose of the office is to protect testing on the range from harmful frequency
interference.
12.2.1. Eglin Gulf Range frequency management consists of obtaining frequency
authorizations (licenses to operate equipment) for all units that test on the Eglin range. They
also provide frequency authorizations for units that support 46 TW tests at other locations
throughout the world. This normally consists of obtaining all frequencies required to
complete a specific test or series of tests. Use the Gulf Area Frequency Coordinator (GAFC)
Temporary Use Equipment Analysis Form to document the characteristics of customer-
provided equipment required to operate on the range in support of testing (see the Useful
Links menu option in the Test Process Tool for link).
12.2.2. Frequency support is provided, where possible, for units from other government and
non-government agencies that test on Eglin. This support normally consists of sharing
―common user‖ frequencies that are assigned to Eglin, such as telemetry (TM) or electronic
countermeasures (ECM), with these other agencies. Eglin common user frequencies are
listed in Center Scheduling Enterprise (CSE). When testing by other agencies requires
specific frequencies not licensed at Eglin, the agency must apply for the frequencies through
their major command (MAJCOM) or other higher headquarters.
12.2.3. Base frequency management consists of obtaining frequencies to support the
administrative and housekeeping functions of the base, such as land mobile radios, air traffic
control, etc.
12.2.4. When all necessary frequency assets in any of the above categories are obtained, the
Frequency Management Office consolidates them on a local Radio Frequency Authorization
(RFA) and distributes this document to all interested agencies. RFAs for programs with
JONs are issued to the PE of that particular project and to the Range Safety and Frequency
Control and Analysis. The PE will file an unclassified RFA in the project folder. Classified
RFAs will be handled in accordance with current security guidance procedures. RFAs that
support administrative functions are issued to the designated POC, Range Safety, and
Frequency Control and Analysis.
12.3. Frequency Control and Analysis (FCA). The 46 TW FCA Office (46 OSS/OSOQ),
882-5330, is the 46 TW Range Spectrum Management Office and ensures the adequacy and
integrity of the entire radio frequency spectrum for all 46 TW test and training programs. They
are responsible for all radio/electromagnetic/ECM test equipment and resource instrumentation
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 99
and provide communications assistance to test planners, PEs, and other users of the Eglin
complex.
12.3.1. Once a mission request has been submitted to scheduling through CSE, the FCA
office checks the request for radio frequency support requirements. The mission submitter
requests unclassified frequencies as they are identified on the RFA, while classified RFA
frequencies are requested by line number only. The FCA office reviews frequencies to
preclude conflicts between individual range programs, adjacent test facilities, and the diverse
government and civil operations in the surrounding environment.
12.3.2. In the event that radio frequency interference does occur during a mission, the GAFC
office should be notified immediately so that they can initiate an investigation and attempt to
resolve the conflict to minimize adverse mission impact.
100 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Chapter 13
DOCUMENTATION
13.1. Introduction. This chapter describes and discusses the documentation associated with a
test program. The first section covers documentation prepared by the PE as part of the
programming process. The second section concerns all other test-related documentation the PE
may encounter and with which the PE should be familiar. Sample formats for all documents
discussed here can be found at the Useful Links menu option in the Test Process Tool. The third
section describes the test project folder which the PE sets up to organize and maintain the test
documentation.
13.2. Programming Engineer-Prepared Documentation.
13.2.1. Caller Log. The PE is usually the first person contacted by a potential customer.
This may be because of some previous work relationship, by referral, or as a matter of
course. The PE (or whoever receives the call) generates a caller log. All 46 TW personnel
have access to the logs. The person taking the call prepares the caller log describing the
caller and the nature of the call, including whatever information was provided. The entries
are self-explanatory and it must be stressed that any information provided is informal. PEs
may review/manage their log entries at any time using the Test Process Tool.
13.2.2. Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) Cost Estimate. A potential customer frequently
requests a ROM for budgeting purposes or to compare prices between Eglin and other test
facilities. The test requirements available early in a program are normally very general and
require some estimation by the customer and the PE as to the general type of test resources
required. The PE draws on experience with similar past test efforts. If templates of recurring
work have been set up in EVCAS, a more accurate cost estimate can be easily provided. A
JON is not required to request a ROM. When a ROM is provided to a potential customer, it
is recommended that the PE enter the information provided using the Caller Log function in
the Test Process Tool.
13.2.3. Test Request (TR). This is a formal request for test support from the 46 TW. This
correspondence, prepared by the customer, outlines the scope of the test effort, identifies his
test requirements and test objectives, defines test periods, and provides special planning
factors/security guidance. Instructions for support of non-US customers are outlined in
Chapter 7. The TR can be in letter format, message, or a Program Introduction Document
(PID).
13.2.4. Program Introduction Document (PID). A PID is a formatted multi-page document
prepared by the customer or responsible test organization (RTO) for testing at national ranges
like the White Sands Missile Range (WSMR), New Mexico. This is part of the Universal
Documentation System (UDS) and serves as the test request. Tests conducted through
Edwards AFB, California, also require a PID. For each PID, there is a subsequent operational
requirement (OR) document prepared by the RTO followed by an operational directive (OD)
prepared by the test range. The PID should be submitted 6 to 7 months prior to the desired
test start date. Appropriate forms and instructions can be obtained from WSMR/NRO-CP,
DSN 258-3110, or the Air Force Liaison office at WSMR, DSN 258-1251. Documents
containing capabilities of other test ranges are kept by 46 TW/XPX, Bldg. 1, (850) 882-5307.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 101
13.2.5. Creating a Job Order Number (JON). Every test and task done at Eglin is identified
with a JON. This JON is annotated on all requests, tasks, schedule requests, and funding
documentation. It ties together all work performed and charges made to that test/task. The
initial 46 TW priority is assigned when the JON is established. Assignment is based on
placing the JON in an appropriate tier group based on the type of program the test supports
(for example, a US government sponsored test/training project would be assigned to tier
group 2A). The priority puts the test/task in the queue for activities such as scheduling,
supplies, modification work, etc. A JON is established using the TW Enterprise System
(TWES) Test Process Tool (TPT). Information required for JON creation includes: JON
Title; Customer Category: (i.e., USAF, commercial, US Navy, US Army, etc.) – menu
provided; Customer Organization: (i.e., ESC, ASC Eglin, AFOTEC, etc.) – menu provided;
Test Managers Organization (i.e., 40 FLTS, 46 SK, 413 FLTS, etc.) – menu provided; Tier
Grouping: (i.e., US Government Sponsored Test/Training, Commercial, etc.) – menu
provided; Reimbursement Code – menu provided; Bill Type - First In-First used (One
customer), or Percentage Charge (Multiple Customers); PE name – menu provided
(required); Type work – menu provided (test, other test, exercise, training, non-test)
(required); Select the test execution organization role: RTO or PTO.
13.2.6. Test Acceptance. The PE is required to prepare a summary (using the Test Process
Tool) of the customer‘s test requirements including a description of the work to be
performed, identification of security/off-base support/cross organizational requirements,
critical resource requirements, anticipated testing dates, estimated costs, and possible issues
and risks for review and formal acceptance of work by TW management. If preliminary data
collection indicates that the test cannot be accomplished as required, an explanation should
be included along with adjustments that might be made to accommodate the test: for
example, change schedules, develop instrumentation, provide aircraft support, etc. Manning
should also be considered and commented on, if applicable. The 46th Operations Group
Commander and the 46th Range Group Director will review test acceptance documents
during their weekly staff meetings or as necessary and will provide test acceptance by
updating the request status on the form. Additionally, they will indicate at what level the
SOC will be signed and will further indicate whether the test will require a technical and
safety review. It should be noted that this data can be changed should additional information
arise.
13.2.7. Request for Planning Funds. Usually, a request for planning funds will be made
immediately following the commitment of the customer to test at Eglin. These funds are
necessary to support early planning meetings and tasks prior to the formulation of the
statement of capability (SOC). A request for sufficient funds should also be made to cover
the planning expense for long lead items and to keep the JON out of deferral.
13.2.8. Kickoff Meeting. The purpose of the kickoff meeting is to gather information from
all the possible players who may have a role in supporting the test and to determine their
availability and capability to support. Instead of a meeting, the PE may opt to use some other
form of communication as long as the ultimate purpose is still achieved. A kickoff meeting
checklist is available at the Useful Links menu item in the Test Process Tool. Figure 13.1,
Planning Factors, provides a list of items to be considered during planning. The checklist is
designed as an agenda with specific information and topics for discussion and, when
completed, becomes the minutes of the meeting which can then be sent to the attendees. The
102 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
kickoff meeting may also introduce the TE as the POC for test design, execution, and
reporting. Action items may be established from this meeting; however, actual work should
not begin until the test has been formally accepted. Discussion usually centers on aircraft
modifications, targets, security, munitions, range resources, data products, and the MOT.
Figure 13.1. Planning Factors
PLANNING FACTORS
The following list provides factors which should be considered in test planning, especially for
flight testing:
• Air or Ground Test
• Land or Water Ranges
• Day or Night Missions
• Active or Passive Test Item (Emitters/Pods) – Power/Frequency/RFA*
• Live or Inert Warhead (Size/Weight)
• Type of Aircraft (Primary/Chase)
• Aircraft Software*
• Captive or Release Tests
• Flight Termination System*
• Flight Conditions (Airspeed/Altitude/Attitude)
• Flight Clearance*
• Supersonic Requirements
• Security Guidance
• HAVE HEMP Conditions
• Central Control Facility or RAPIDS use
• GPS, Radar, or Photo-T TSPI
• Telemetry (Number Data Streams/Format)
• Laser, IR, or Video Requirements
• Tracking Cameras
• Target Area Cameras
• Targets (Air/Ground/Mobile/Still)*
• Range Scoring/Recovery/Cleanup
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 103
• Special Facilities/Power
• Security Guards
• Data Reduction/Analysis
• Environmental Issues*
• Facility/Aircraft Modifications*
• Type of Report
• Software (Data Reduction – CCF)*
• Test Item Recovery
NOTE: * - Potentially extensive long lead actions.
13.2.9. Statement of Capability (SOC):
13.2.9.1. General. The SOC is an agreement between the 46 TW and the customer
regarding the test to be conducted. It specifies estimated schedule, costs, responsibilities,
deliverables and risks. This document formally requests required funding from the
customer to conduct the test. The SOC is prepared by the PE and represents 46 TW
formal acceptance of a customer‘s test workload. The SOC has several important
purposes:
13.2.9.1.1. Formally accepts the customer‘s workload for the 46 TW
13.2.9.1.2. Provides an estimate of the test project cost and schedule and establishes
the project baseline
13.2.9.1.3. Defines the WBSs used to construct the project baseline
13.2.9.1.4. Defines the respective responsibilities of the 46 TW and the customer
13.2.9.1.5. Provides an assessment of the cost, schedule, and technical risk associated
with the test project
13.2.9.1.6. Records the signatures of key 46 TW and customer personnel, indicating
a mutual agreement of the project baseline.
13.2.9.1.7. Document deliverables (46 TW and customer)
13.2.9.2. Amendments. The SOC is, in effect, the project baseline. Therefore, any
significant change to the baseline must be documented in writing through a revised SOC.
Criteria used to determine when amendments will be issued should be determined with
the customer in advance of the original SOC and agreed to prior to signature. As a rule,
an amendment should be issued any time there is a change in scope of the work originally
agreed to for the test. When in doubt, the decision as to whether a SOC amendment is
necessary should be elevated within the PE organization.
13.2.9.3. SOC Format. See paragraph 4.2 for WBS details. The SOC/ Pricing and
Availability (P&A) format is available at the Useful Links menu option in the Test
Process Tool. The format is applicable to DoD, FMS, and commercial tests except as
104 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
indicated. You can delete items that clearly do not apply to your program, and you can
add additional information, if necessary. Keep in mind, however, that the first two
―planning‖ paragraphs under Section III always apply because 46 TW does not execute
without some involvement in test and evaluation master plan development, integrated test
team participation, program management reviews, document reviews, expert consulting,
or some aspect of strategic planning to meet program milestones at the PE and TE levels.
13.2.9.4. SOC/P&A Coordination Process. Once the SOC/P&A document is drafted,
approval and signature requirements are coordinated. SOC coordination is accomplished
using Livelink. The PE starts the SOC workflow when the SOC document is uploaded.
As soon as 46 TW coordination and signature are completed, the PE downloads the SOC
and forwards it to the customer for signature. Customer signature of the SOC represents
formal acceptance of the SOC agreement. When the SOC is returned, the PE uploads, as
a minimum, the customer signature page to close out the workflow. For commercial
tests, the signed SOC will be incorporated by AAC/PKE into a test contract as an
attachment. In this case, the commercial test customer and the contracting officer‘s
signatures on the test contract represent the formal acceptance of the workload (see
Chapter 8).
13.2.10. Environmental Impact Analysis. An analysis of the environmental impact is
required by public law for all tests proposed by 46 TW to be conducted in the Eglin area.
The PE begins this process by submission of an AF Form 813, Request for Environmental
Impact Analysis. Because of the importance of environmental issues, a separate chapter of
this guide (Chapter 14) is devoted to the subject including how to prepare the AF Form 813.
Direct costs for any environmental support will be billed to the JON, so a cost estimate
should be requested for inclusion in any ROM or SOC. Check with other test ranges when
46 TW tests are to be conducted at off-base sites.
13.2.11. Aircraft Modifications/Changes. Aircraft within the 46 TW fleet are generally
nonstandard in that they require special test instrumentation or configurations to satisfy
unique test requirements. The PE begins the modification/change process with either an
AFMC Form 244, T-2 Modification Configuration Control Board Directive, or with an AAC
Form 4039, Software/Hardware Review Document (SHRD) if considered a minor change.
For more details concerning the process contact the 846th TSS, at 882-4501.
13.2.12. Flight Clearance (FC) Process. A flight clearance is a document qualifying an
aircraft configuration safe for flight within stated flight limits. Flight clearances contain the
limits for carriage, employment, and jettison in airspeed, symmetric and un-symmetric load
factor, and dive angle. The flight clearance also states the roll rate category of the
configuration. For all non-certified combinations of external stores, new stores, or
nonstandard fuze or lanyard routings, a flight clearance is required to conduct flight testing
on AFMC aircraft. These clearances are intended for flight test missions only and are
generated by the Air Force SEEK EAGLE Office (AFSEO). The request for AFSEO support
to provide the flight clearance is a Livelink coordinated process now. The work flow can be
initiated via Livelink. To request support, refer to the Seek Eagle Customers Guide (see
Useful Links menu option in the Test Process Tool for links). Requests, at a minimum,
should include: Aircraft and model; Configuration with any options, i.e., lists all stores
needed and their location; Aircraft limits, altitude, airspeed, plus g‘s, minus g‘s, and any
release conditions; Complete Store Technical and Mass Property (STAMP) sheet for each
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 105
store (This should be complete with measurements made by the Precision Measurement
Facility (PMF)); Point of contact name, phone, organization, and address; Job order number;
and include any comments or factors, which may cause safety-of-flight issues.
13.2.12.1. All FC for 46 OG flight test programs, to include those issued by the AFSEO,
aircraft prime contractors, and acquisition offices, will be included in the TD as a
separate appendix. Depending on the FC requirements for the test, one of the following
paragraphs will be added to paragraph 2 (Special Planning Guidance) of the Additional
Information section of the TD:
13.2.12.1.1. No new AFSEO FC is required. This airborne test program does not
require a new FC. All configurations and test points are within published Aircraft
Technical Order-1-2 limits.
13.2.12.1.2. Previously approved FC. This airborne test program will be flown under
a previously-published FC. This FC, FC-XXXXXX, was previously used for JON
ABCD1234. A copy is attached as appendix X.
13.2.12.1.3. A new AFSEO Test FC is required. This airborne test program requires
a new FC. Recommended FC, FC-XXXXXX is attached as appendix X for approval
by the Airborne Test review/Safety Board conducted on DD MMM YYYY.
13.2.12.1.4. A new Acquisition Office FC is required. This airborne test program
requires a new FC approved by the XXX acquisition office. A copy of the FC (or
Draft FC) is attached as appendix X.
13.2.13. Test Directive (TD): The TD is the authorization to commit funds and resources to
execute the test. The TD is reviewed, approved, and signed using the 46 TW Livelink
workflow process. The TD includes the MOT and appropriate appendices. The MOT must
be completed prior to the TW technical and safety review if the program has been identified
for the review. Low risk ground TDs are approved and signed by the TEO/CC. For flight
tests, the TD must be ready for publication prior to the Airborne Test Review and Safety
Board (ATR/SB). After the ATR/SB and applicable Wing and Center risk
notification/approval requirements, the TEO/CC signs Low-Risk flight TDs, while the
OG/CC will sign Medium and High risk TDs. The date the TD is signed becomes the official
start date of the active test phase. PE must update the JON phase in the Test Process Tool.
13.2.13.1. Final TD. The PE ensures that all appropriate appendices are prepared in a
timely manner. The PE reviews each appendix for completeness, accuracy, and
agreement with other appendices involved with the test, especially wording of the
objectives. Upon receipt of the appropriate documents, the PE assembles the basic TD
and appropriate appendices with a cover letter (sample available at Useful Links link in
the Test Process Tool) and distribution list. The package is entered for appropriate
approval and signature into the Livelink TD Coordination Workflow. Once the TD is
signed, all test participants are authorized to expend manhours/resources. Prior to TD
approval, manhours can be expended only for planning and long lead-time items and for
preparations specifically authorized by an early turn-on letter. The early turn-on letter is
not a substitute for a signed TD and no testing is authorized by it. The letter is an
authorization to do non-test activities in scheduling prior to TD signature. Any or all of
the following appendices could apply: MOT/CONOPS; Technical Support Appendix
106 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
(TSA); Logistics Support Appendix (LSA); Safety Appendix (SA); Off-Base
Deployment Brief; Flight Clearance; Interim Authority to Test/Operate (IATT/O); and
Security Plan.
13.2.13.1.1. Method of Test (MOT) Appendix. The MOT, or Concept of Operations
(CONOPS), is the first appendix to the TD and is a detailed plan for conducting the
test. It covers specific test objectives, test item description, materiel, instrumentation
requirements, test methodology, success criteria, and data products required.
Additionally, details of data analysis and data handling should be included in the
MOT. As the test conductor/director, the TE is the primary author of the MOT. It is
a fundamental requirement for the TE to develop a thorough understanding of the
purpose of the test item and its operation. It is also required that the TE applies
applicable Design of Experiments (DOE) principles to test design. Once the MOT is
completed it is entered into Livelink for coordination and electronic signature.
13.2.13.1.2. Other Appendices. In addition to the MOT, a TSA, LSA, and SA are
normally required. These inputs to the TD describe the support to be provided, who
will provide it, and to what extent. Most of this support can be coordinated at the
draft TD meeting; however, if any changes to requirements develop, they must be
coordinated and reflected in the TD or subsequent TD amendments. Every TD does
not need each of these appendices. The PE and TE will decide which ones are
required for a given test. When applicable, the TD will include a statement why
normal support appendices are not required.
13.2.13.2. TD Amendments. It is often necessary to amend test documentation because
of changes. Amendments involving a change of scope must be approved by the 46 TW
Commander or designated representative to ensure availability of resources.
Amendments which are not a change in scope can be signed by the TEO
commander/director. A change in scope is defined as those changes which significantly
alter the size of the test, exceed the previously approved test envelope, introduce any new
test hazards, or modify the previously approved objectives. TD amendments usually
constitute a SOC amendment.
13.2.14. Deferrals and Excess Funds. Test projects often encounter deferrals or excess
funds. Deferrals can occur in any phase of the test cycle, including completion. A SOC
amendment should be prepared requesting additional funds for deferrals occurring during the
planning, active, or reporting phase. Either the PE or TE can research the cause, but the PE
is responsible for obtaining the additional funds. The PE is also responsible for notifying the
customer to withdraw any excess funds after the test has closed out. Organizational finance
personnel can provide the assistance necessary to resolve these issues. See Chapter 4 for
additional information on deferrals.
13.2.15. Suspension, Completion, and Termination of Tests.
13.2.15.1. Test Suspension. Normally, a test will be suspended if a delay of 60 days or
more is expected; however, it may be suspended for less time if conditions warrant. The
46 TW PE should be aware that changing a programs phase to Suspended does not
prevent charges from accruing in JOCAS.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 107
13.2.15.2. Test Reactivation. Upon test reactivation, the PE will insure the project
baseline is prepared or updated according to current guidelines.
13.2.15.3. Termination of Tests. Test termination may occur when all planning efforts
are discontinued before completion of test planning or active testing.
13.2.15.4. Completion/Closeout of Tests:
13.2.15.4.1. Test completion occurs upon successful accomplishment of all the
objectives of the TD and amendments. The letter of completion/closeout will be
initiated by the PE immediately after the letter report/technical report/data package
has been signed or notice is received that further testing has been terminated.
13.2.15.4.2. The first day of the closeout phase is the calendar day after the technical
report/data package is approved; for support tests, it starts the calendar day following
active phase completion. The end of the closeout phase is determined by the funds
status in JOCAS. A JON cannot end its closeout phase until its balance in the JOCAS
system is at zero. Other criteria may be applied that would prevent the JON from
ending.
13.2.15.4.3. Lessons Learned Program. Letters of completion for tests which reach
the active phase will be accompanied by a lessons learned letter; if no lessons were
learned, this letter is not required. Any person associated with the test program is
responsible to submit information which may be valuable to other members of the
T&E community in accomplishing other programs. These are lessons learned that
pertain to any phase of a program. The lessons learned letter will be routed through
the TEO technical director or commander who will include a decision whether or not
to forward the lesson learned to AFMC for inclusion in the AFMC database.
13.3. Other Test-Related Documentation. During the course of test planning, the PE will,
from time to time, encounter documents or events relative to testing but not directly within his
area of responsibility. The following list reflects some of the more frequent ones.
13.3.1. Statement of Capability (SC). The National Range representative prepares the SC in
response to each PID. It provides their capabilities, in general terms, to support the
requirement contained within a given PID. It may or may not contain a cost estimate. The
term SC is unique to the White Sands Missile Range (WSMR).
13.3.2. Operational Requirement. The OR, prepared by the RTO, provides the National
Range with details of the general support requirements previously submitted in the PID.
13.3.3. Operational Directive. The OD, prepared by the National Range representative, is
the final document necessary for scheduling missions at a National Test Range.
13.3.4. Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP). The TEMP is a living document prepared
by the System Program Office (SPO). It is generated early in the program development cycle
and outlines the general plans, objectives, and evaluation criteria throughout DT&E and
IOT&E. The RTO supports the development of Section 3, DT&E. Test Planning Working
Groups are held periodically to review and update the TEMP.
13.4. PE Project Folder. The PE Project Folder is a virtual folder that contains key working
documentation associated with a JON. At the creation of a JON, TWDB automatically creates
the virtual project folder. It includes all electronic documents created in the TWDB, and links to
108 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
the latest financial report, EVA Chart, Post Mission Reports, Weekly Activity Report, and
Livelink JON Project Folder. The working section is for editable documents. The TWDB virtual
PE Project Folder is the starting point for the creation of new test files, and is the repository of
working files that are constantly updated from multiple sources.
13.4.1. Organization. TWDB creates/prints six sections for the folder, and a PE test
checklist. Since TWDB is for Unclassified information only, Classified projects may require
the creation of a hardcopy PE Project Folder.
13.4.2. Livelink JON Project Folder. The Livelink JON Project Folder contains the
final/signed version of key test documentation required for test execution. The Livelink JON
Project Folder is the official repository for all final test documentation. In addition, it
includes any additional electronic documents you upload to
13.4.3. Disposition. Unless there are unresolved test-related issues, test documentation may
be destroyed after completion of the R&D effort, or when no longer needed, whichever is
sooner
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 109
Chapter 14
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROCESS (EIAP)
14.1. Introduction. To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Eglin is
required to assess the environmental impact of all proposed actions and projects. These include
construction projects, airspace actions, and military missions, as well as paving of new areas,
development of major weapon systems, and change and realignment of force structures. The
process of complying with NEPA is called the Environmental Impact Analysis Process (EIAP)
and is directed by AFI 32-7061, The Environmental Impact Analysis Process (EIAP), and Title
32 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 989, EIAP.
14.1.1. The Air Force developed the EIAP as a decision-making tool to provide a systematic,
objective, and defensible analysis of the potential environmental impacts of a proposed
action (a construction project or a training activity, for example). The EIAP was developed
to ensure compliance with the requirements of NEPA, which is the basic national charter for
environmental protection. This law requires early consideration and analysis of
environmental concerns when planning new projects or actions. This chapter serves as an
introduction to EIAP and its required documentation. Complete details can be found in the
Web based Unit Environmental Coordinator (UEC) Environmental Handbook (see Useful
Links menu option in the Test Process Tool).
14.2. Procedures:
14.2.1. Air Force Form 813:
14.2.1.1. Eglin has developed EIAP procedures and an interactive Web site to help the
proponent complete required NEPA documents for the proposed project or activity. The
PE initiates the EIAP by submitting an AF Form 813, Request for Environmental Impact
Analysis. This is a WEB based document that can be filed electronically by following
the directions and filling in the form at the Eglin AF Form 813 website (see Useful Links
menu option in the Test Process Tool for link). The AF Form 813 is the primary form
used for EIAP and prompts the proponent for required information about the project or
action.
14.2.1.2. One of the most critical steps in the EIAP is the preparation of the Description
of Proposed Action and Alternatives (DOPAA), Block 5, of the AF Form 813. The
DOPAA starts the EIAP, as required by AFI 32-7061, NEPA, and the Council of
Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations. Failure to follow the EIAP increases the risk
of injunctions. Projects or mission activities could be placed on hold pending resolution
of the NEPA issue. If substantive environmental law (Clean Water Act, Endangered
Species Act, etc) has been violated because the EIAP was not done properly, the
proponent and potentially the Commander could be liable to civil and criminal penalties.
Due to the long lead time required to complete some forms of the EIAP, the PE should
initiate the process as early as possible in the planning phase of the project. The PE
should use the following criteria for completing AF Form 813 and should complete
Section I only.
14.2.1.2.1. Block 1: Name of the environmental planning function - 96CEG/CEVSP.
110 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
14.2.1.2.2. Block 2: PE‘s name and organization.
14.2.1.2.3. Block 2a: PE‘s phone.
14.2.1.2.4. Block 3: Title of proposed action or project.
14.2.1.2.5. Block 4: Purpose and need for action. Include the purpose of the
proposed action (mission/project objectives) and the need for the proposed action.
Include a need date for the EIAP action and identify the decision to be made.
14.2.1.2.6. Block 5: DOPAA. Include a description of who proposes to do what,
where, and when (include the date that the environmental analysis and documentation
need to be completed). List all environmental issues (use the list in Section II of AF
Form 813 to help identify these issues). List the selection criteria (minimum mission
requirements, minimum environmental guidelines, etc.). Describe all alternatives.
List any permits needed. Figure 14.1 shows an excerpt from the Shipley Associates
Workshop Manual titled Preparing DOPAAs (AF Form 813), which suggests the
organization and content of a DOPAA. Figure 14.2 is an example of completed
Sections 4 and 5 of AF Form 813.
14.2.1.2.7. Block 6: Name/Grade of the organization‘s Unit Environmental
Coordinator (UEC).
14.2.1.2.8. Blocks 6a, b: Signature/Date of UEC (Signature block to read Charles W.
Garger, GS-12, 46 OG Unit Environmental Coordinator).
14.2.1.2.9. Blocks 7 to 16: To be completed by 96CEG/CEVSP.
14.2.1.2.10. Block 17: To be completed by EMSP. The PE may suggest the level of
analysis and documentation. EMSP will make the final decision.
14.2.1.2.11. Block 18: To be used by EMSP only. Any stipulations or mitigations
will be listed here. These items are mandatory for compliance and must be adhered to
as conditions of any environmental approvals for the project to proceed.
14.2.1.2.12. Blocks 19a and b: To be completed by EMSP.
14.2.1.3. After the PE has completed Section I of AF Form 813, it is filed and submitted
electronically to the UEC for signature. If unable to submit electronically, contact 46
OG/CA-EM, (call 882-8835 to coordinate appropriate forwarding). The UEC will check
the AF Form 813 for completeness and quality of content and will direct revisions, if
needed, before signature. The UEC will then forward AF Form 813 to EMSP. EMSP
will review and assign the appropriate level of the EIAP documentation to the project.
EMSP conducts an electronic review of all AF Forms 813 submitted. In some cases, the
PE may be asked to attend a meeting to provide additional information. If the PE does
not attend, there is a strong chance that the AF Form 813 cannot be completed, thus
delaying the approval process. There are three EIAP levels that can be assigned:
Categorical Exclusion (CATEX), Environmental Assessment (EA), or Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS).
14.2.1.4. Categorical Exclusion. A CATEX will be assigned if no significant
environmental effects will occur and the proposal fits a category listed in AFI 32-7061,
Attachment 2. A CATEX can also be assigned with special conditions. A CATEX is not
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 111
authority to proceed; it is authority to proceed after the special conditions are met. These
conditions are specified on the AF Form 813 final document signed by 96CEV/CEVSP.
Allow approximately 2 weeks in the planning cycle for a project that qualifies for a
CATEX.
14.2.1.5. Environmental Assessment. An EA will be required for projects that do not
meet the criteria for a CATEX. The EA may be prepared by the requester, and then
coordinated, revised as needed, and approved through 96CEG/CEVSP, or the EA may be
prepared in-house in EMSP or contracted out. The test proponent should be prepared to
fund EA preparation. If an EA is required, allow approximately 30 to 120 days for
preparation after kickoff (requires a complete, firm DOPAA from proponent), and an
additional 30 to 60 days for review, revision, and public notification. These time periods
are approximate and some complex projects may require longer time frames to
accomplish.
14.2.1.6. Environmental Impact Statement. An EIS must be prepared when it has been
determined that significant environmental effects will occur. An EIS will be performed
by a contractor and will be paid for by the project. If an EIS is required, allow 18 months
to 2 years for a decision to be made on whether the project may proceed.
14.3. Reassessments. Once the approved level of environmental documentation is received by
the PE, it must be included in the project folder. If at any time during the project an amendment
is required to the TD that increases the scope of work or changes the MOT, the environmental
effects must be reassessed. If the reassessment indicates that the impacts of the new work are
adequately documented in the original TD assessment, the amendment should state this fact. If
the new work changes the impacts as documented, the environmental analysis documentation
should be amended by submitting the additional information to EMSP for review. The TD
amendment should show that the assessment has been amended.
14.4. Tests at Sites Other Than Eglin. When the 46 TW is the RTO for tests being conducted
at sites other than Eglin, it is the responsibility of the PE to assure that the POC at that site has
coordinated the environmental analysis documentation with the staff environmental coordinator
at the test site. If the 46 TW is supporting a test but is not the RTO, the assessment will usually
be limited to the support provided by the 46 TW.
112 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Figure 14.1. Suggested Organization and Content of a DOPAA
SUGGESTED ORGANIZATION AND CONTENT OF A DOPAA
4. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION
4.1 Purpose of the action (mission objectives)
4.2 Need for the action (why this action is desired or required)
5. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES (DOPAA)
5.1 Description of the proposed action
5.2 Description of the decision that must be made and identification of the decision maker
5.3 Anticipated environmental issues (optional)
5.3.1 Physical
5.3.2 Biological
5.3.3 Economic (only if applicable)
5.3.4 Social (only if applicable)
5.4 Selection criteria
5.4.1 Minimum mission requirements
5.4.2 Minimum environmental guidelines
5.5 Description of alternatives
5.5.1 No-action alternative
5.5.1.1 Subaction 1
5.5.1.2 Subaction 2
5.5.1.3 Subaction 3
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 113
5.5.1.x Et cetera
5.5.1.x Mitigation actions
5.5.1.x Monitoring actions
5.5.2 Proposed action (what, where, when, how)
5.5.2.1 Subaction 1
5.5.2.2 Subaction 2
5.5.2.x Et cetera
5.5.2.x Mitigation actions
5.5.2.x Monitoring actions
5.5.3 Another reasonable action alternative
5.5.3.1 Subaction 1
5.5.3.2 Subaction 2
5.5.3.x Et cetera
5.5.3.x Mitigation actions
5.5.3.x Monitoring actions
5.6 List of required permits (modified or new), licenses, and entitlements
114 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Figure 14.2. Example of Completed DOPAA
SAMPLE ONLY
BAREBONES DOPAA
4. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION
4.1 The purpose of the action is to provide a jet-engine facility that can:
__ Inspect 10 big-hummer engines per week.
__ Repair 5 big-hummer engines per week.
4.2 The facility is needed because the recent realignment increased the number of primary
aircraft assigned to this base, which in turn increased the number of engines that require
regular inspection and maintenance, in accordance with DoD Regulation XXX.
The existing inspection and maintenance facility is in Building 203 and is capable of
inspecting six big-hummer engines per week and repairing four big-hummer engines per
week. This facility is 8,400 square feet. To inspect 10 big-hummer engines per week and
repair 5 big-hummer engines per week, a facility with a minimum of 12,500 square feet is
needed.
No additional personnel are needed.
5. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES (DOPAA)
5.1 Flatland Air Force Base proposes to construct a new 12,500-square foot engine inspection
and maintenance facility approximately 300 feet east of Hangar 6 during 1996.
5.2 Decision That Must Be Made
The decision that [name and title] must make is whether to construct this new inspection
and maintenance facility or not and, if so, where, how, and when to construct it.
The realignment decision that brought the additional aircraft to Flatland Air Force Base
was made at higher Air Force levels and was authorized by the Congress of the United
States.
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 115
SAMPLE ONLY
5.3 Anticipated Environmental Issues
5.3.1 Hazardous waste disposal (past and future)
5.3.2 Noise on and off base
5.3.3 Air quality on and off base
5.3.4 Visual quality of the building and grounds
5.3.5 Traffic along the flightline
5.4 Selection Criteria
This facility must have the following capabilities and characteristics:
5.4.1 Operational requirements
__ Inspect 10 big-hummer engines per week
__ Repair 5 big-hummer engines per week
5.4.2 Location and transport requirements
__ Located as close as possible to Hangar 6 where the engines are
removed from the aircraft
__ Be accessible by paved road capable of carrying heavy loads
5.4.3 Interior requirements
__ Electric hoists
__ Hydraulic lifts
__ Cleaning and degreasing facilities
__ Spray booth equivalent to those in the existing facility
__ 440-volt, 3-phase power
__ Telephones
__ Potable water
__ Sanitary sewer system
5.4.4 Environmental requirements
__ Hazardous wastes must be disposed of in accordance with EPA regulations
and Flatland Air Force Base guidelines. Additional waste materials (primarily
degreasing solvents and lubricants) must be handled according to DoD Directive
XXX and EPA Regulation XXX.
__ Noise from inspection tests must not exceed the present level.
116 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
SAMPLE ONLY
__ The exterior of the facility must be unobtrusive to the home owners to the east
of the base.
__ The grounds of the facility must be attractively landscaped.
__ Traffic along the flightline must not hinder flight operations.
5.5 Description of Alternatives
5.5.1 No-action Alternative: Continued Use of Building 203
5.5.2 Proposed Action Alternative: Construct a New Facility 300 Ft East of Hangar 6
5.5.3 Alternative 3: Renovate Building 203
5.5.4 Alternative 4: Construct a New Facility 1.2 Miles from Hangar 6
5.5.5 Alternative 5: Conduct Engine Inspection and Repair at an Off-base Location
5.6 List of Required Permits, Licenses, and Entitlements
__ Hazardous waste permit from EPA (new if in a new location and modified if additional
work is performed at the present site)
__ Noise permit from Flatland City if the decibel level increases by 5 percent
__ Air-quality permit from the State if the inspection and maintenance activities are moved to
a new location
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 117
Chapter 15
POINTS OF CONTACT
15.1. Points of Contact
Table 15.1. Points of Contact
Organization Office Symbol Phone No.
Aircraft
Aircraft Acquisition
Configuration Management
T-2 Modification Squadron
Maintenance Operations Center (MOC)
Maintenance Supervision
Red AMU (F-15/A-10)
Blue AMU (F-16)
Aircraft Configurations (Loading Crews)
F-15/A-10
F-16
46 OSS/OSXX
40 FLTS/CAX
846 TSS
46 MOS/MXOO
40 AMXS/MXA
40 AMXS/MXAR
40 AMXS/MXAB
40 AMXS/MXARW
40 AMXS/MXABW
(850) 882-4411
(850) 882-9190
(850) 882-4501
(850) 882-4691
(850) 882-5444
(850) 882-2261
(850) 882-3878
(850) 882-/4176
(850) 882-2489
Airspace Manager
Airspace Management
Air Traffic Control (RAPCON)
Tower
Airfield Manager (Base Ops)
46 OSS/OSAA
46 OSS/OSAR
46 OSS/OSAT
46 OSS/OSAO
(850) 882-9069
(850) 882-8160
(850) 882-5196
(850) 882-2614
Commercial Tests 46 TW/XPX (850) 882-6752
Central Control Facility (CCF) 46 RNCS (850) 882-5776
Contracting
Contracting Directorate
Test, Evaluation, and Specialized Contracts
Division
AAC/PK
AAC/PKET
AAC/PKET
(850) 882-4398
(850) 882-0190
(850) 882-0181
118 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Organization Office Symbol Phone No.
Environmental
Range & Airspace Sustainment
46 OG Unit Environmental Coordinator
46 RANG-UEC
46 MXG-UEC
Environmental Analysis Branch
Natural Resources (Jackson Guard)
Pollution Prevention
Hazardous Materials Management
46 TW/XPE
46 OSS/OSXR
46 RANSS/TSRS
46 MOS/MXOPX
96 CEG/CEVSP
96 CEG/CEVSN
96 CEG/CEVCP
96 CEG/CEVCP
(850) 882-6440
(850) 882-8709
(850) 882 4713
(850) 882 6291
(850) 882-4435
(850) 882-4164
(850) 882-7690
(850) 882-7690
EOD 96 CEG/CED (850) 882-3225
Financial
46 TW Financial Management
46 OG Financial Management
JOCAS Office
46 TW/FM
46 OSS/OSXB
46 TW/FMP
(850) 882-8964
(850) 882-9767
(850) 882-6768
International Programs and Support Branch AAC/ASK (850) 882-9758
Frequency
46 TW Frequency Management Office
Frequency Allocation
46 OSS/OSOF
96 CG/SCWF
(850) 882-5330
(850) 882-4416
Logistics
Logistics Test Support Section
Munitions Accountable Supply Officer
(MASO)
46 TW Logistics Materiel Control Activity
(LMCA)
46 MOS/MXOPT
46 MXS/
MXMWMA
46 RANSS/
TSRMO
(850) 882-3535/
2811/2437
(850) 882-7624
(850) 882-
9348/9347/ 5821
Operations Group
46th Operations Support Squadron
780th Test Squadron
46th Test Squadron
40th Flight Test Squadron Operations
413th Flight Test Squadron
46 OG/CC
46 OSS
780 TS/OGM
46 TS/DO
40 FLTS/DO
413 FLTS/DO
882-3955
882-4675
882-5475
882-9576
882-9351
884-3618
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 119
Organization Office Symbol Phone No.
Supervisor of Flying (SOF)
46th Weather Flight
40 FLTS Operations
46 WF/DO
882-3368
882-6805
Photography
Photo Lab Scheduling
Ground Photography, Still Photos
Alert (After hours/Quick Reaction)
(Aircraft Cameras, Still Photos)
Film Edit
Video Edit
Customer Service
Film Library
Priority/Rush Processing
Airborne Photography
Photo Lab Contractor
40 FLTS/DOOP
(850) 882-4353
(850) 882-2861
(850) 882-2502
(850) 882-2771
(850) 882-4313
(850) 882-9394
(850) 882-4352
(850) 882-9106
(850) 882-4869
(850) 882-2658
Plans Organization
Plans Office
Information Technology Division
Resources Division
Strategic Initiatives Division
Test Security Office
46 TW/XP
46 TW/XPI
46 TW/FMP
46 TW/XPX
46 TW/XPS
(850) 882-5622
(850) 882-4491
(850) 882-8963
(850) 882-6752
(850) 882-3580
Procurement
Operational Contracting Logistics
Materiel Control Activity (LMCA)
AAC/PK
46 RANSS/TSRMO
(850) 882-0039
(850) 882-9347
Programming Engineer’s Guide Focal Point 46 TW/XPI (850) 882-4493
Protocol Office AAC/CCP (850) 882-3011
Public Affairs AAC/PA (850) 882-3931
120 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Organization Office Symbol Phone No.
Safety
Flight Safety
Ground Safety
Range Safety
Systems Safety
Weapons Safety
AAC/SE
AAC/SEF AAC/SEG
AAC/SEU
AAC/SES AAC/SEW
(850) 882-7335
(850) 882-7352
(850) 882-7358
(850) 882-
4000/8232
(850) 882-
7340/7305
(850) 882-7381
Scheduling
Range Central Scheduling
Maintenance Plans, Scheduling and
Documentation
Range Contractor Planners
CSE Help
Range Operations (ROCC) (Mission Day)
Hot Seat
46 OSS/OSOS
46 OSS/OSMX
46 OSS/OSOS
(850) 882-3883
(850) 882-2100
(850) 882-
4994/4954/5735
(850) 882-4491 Opt
4
(850) 882-5800
(850) 882-
4597/4598
Security
Information Protection
46 TW Test Security (96 ABW/IPX)
Centralized Control Facility (CCF) Access
Communications Security (COMSEC)
46 TW Foreign Disclosure
Security Police Squadron
FOIA Manager/FOUO Management
96 ABW/IP
46 TW/XPS
46 RNCS
96 CG/SCBP
96 ABW/IPF
96 SPS/SFO
96 CS/SCSSIF
(850) 882-9758
(850) 882-3580
(850) 882-5776
(850) 882-3389
(850) 882-5356
(850) 882-3215
(850) 882-3315
Targets
46 TW Targets Office
46 RANSS/TSRF
(850) 882-1891
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 121
Organization Office Symbol Phone No.
Technical Organizations
846th Test Support Squadron
782nd Test Squadron
782nd TS Installed Systems Flight
46th Range Support Squadron
46th Test Support Squadron
46th Test Systems Squadron
46th OSS Range Management Flight
846 TSS/CA
782 TS/CLA
782 TS/RNWP
46 RANSS/CA
46 TSS/CA
46 TSSQ/CA
46 RANMF/TA
(850) 882-0737
(850) 882-4670
(850) 882-2594
(850) 882-1925
(850) 882-2337
(850) 882-7037
(850) 882-2084
Technical Reports
Technical Reports Flight
46 OSS/OSXR
(850) 882-2211
Technology Transfer AAC/DRX (850) 882-8096
CONCLUDED
MICHAEL T. BREWER, Col, USAF
Commander, 46th Test Wing
122 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
Attachment 1
GLOSSARY OF REFERENCES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION
References
46 TWI 33-104, Fault Billing Procedures, 15 Jul 2011
AFMCI 99-103, 46 TW Supplement 1, Release of Test Information, 21 May 2008
AACI 10-1101, Volume I, Have Hemp
AACI 21-202, Munitions Technical Data
AACI 91-201, AAC Test Safety Review Process, 7 Mar 2011
AFMCI 21-126, Temporary 2 (T2) Modification of Aerospace Vehicles, 19 Jul 2005
AFMCI 65-602, Uniform Reimbursement and Pricing Procedures, 21 Feb 2006
AFMCI 65-603, Appropriation Reimbursement Procedures, 18 Dec 2003
AFI 13-212, Range Planning and Operations, 16 Nov 2007
AFI 16-201, Air Force Foreign Disclosure and Technology Transfer Program, 1 Dec 2004
AFI 21-101, Aircraft and Equipment Maintenance Management, 26 Jul 2010
AFI 21-201, Conventional Munitions Maintenance Management, 11 Dec 2009
AFI 31-401, Information Security Program Management, 1 Nov 2005
AFI 32-7061, The Environmental Impact Analysis Process (EIAP), 12 Mar 2003
AFI 61-205, Sponsoring or Co-Sponsoring, Conducting, and Presenting DoD-Related Scientific
Papers at Unclassified and Classified Conferences, Symposia, and Other Similar Meetings, 25
Jul 1994
AFI 91-205, Nonnuclear Munitions Safety Board, 1 Jul 1998
DoDI 5000.2, Operation of the Defense Acquisition System, 8 Dec 2008
DoD 5200.1-I, Index of Security Classification Guides (S), 1 Sep 1996
DoD 5200.1-R, Information Security Program, 14 Jan 1997
DoD 5220.22-M, National Industrial Security Program, 27 Sep 2004
DoD 5230.20, Visits and Assignments of Foreign Representatives, 22 Jun 2005
DoD FMR 7000.14-R, Volume 4, Accounting Policy and Procedures, Apr 2011
DoD FMR 7000.14-R, Volume 11A, Reimbursable Operations, Policy and Procedures, Jul 2011
Technical Order 11A-1-47/Defense Logistics Agency Regulations (DLAR) 8220.1, Department
of Defense Ammunition and Explosives Hazard Classification Procedures, 5 Jan 1998
Adopted Forms
AF Form 847, Recommendation for Change of Publication
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 123
Abbreviations and Acronyms
AAC—Air Armament Center
ABW—Air Base Wing
ACWP—Actual Cost of Work Performed
ADPE—Automated Data Processing Equipment
AFB—Air Force Base
AFMAN—Air Force Manual
AFMC—Air Force Materiel Command
AFOSH—Air Force Occupational Safety and Health
AFP—Air Force Pamphlet
AFPD—Air Force Policy Directive
AFSAC—Air Force Security Assistance Center
AFSEO—Air Force Seek Eagle Office
AFSOC—Air Force Special Operations Command
ATR/SB—Airborne Test Review/Safety Board
BAC—Budget at Completion
BCWP—Budgeted Cost of Work Performed
BCWS—Budgeted Cost of Work Scheduled
BE—Baseline Estimate
C2—Command and Control
C3—Command, Control, and Communications
C2ISR—Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and
Reconnaissance
CATEX—Categorical Exclusion
CC—Cost Center
CCB—Configuration Control Board
CCF—Central Control Facility
CEG—Civil Engineer Group
CI—Critical Information
COMPUSEC—Computer Security
COMSEC—Communications Security
CONOPS—Concept of Operations
CIGTF—Central Inertial Guidance Test Facility
124 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
CRADA—– Cooperative Research and Development Agreement
CSE—Center Scheduling Enterprise
DOD—Department of Defense
DT&E—Developmental Test and Evaluation
DTIC—Defense Technical Information Center
EA—Environmental Assessment
EAC—Estimate at Completion
EAL—Entry Authority List
ECM—Electronic Countermeasures
EEIC—Element of Expense Investment Code
EIAP—Environmental Impact Analysis Process
EIS—Environmental Impact Statement
EPA—Environmental Protection Agency
ERCF—Eglin Radar Control Facility
ERSM—Eglin Range Spectrum Manager
EVA—Earned Value Analysis
EW—Electronic Warfare
FAR—Federal Acquisition Regulation
FCA—Frequency Control and Analysis
FMS—Foreign Military Sales
FOIA—Freedom of Information Act
FOT&E—Follow-on Test and Evaluation
FOUO—For Official Use Only
FY—Fiscal Year
GAFC—Gulf Area Frequency Coordinator
GAFS—General Accounting and Finance System
GRDCUS—Gulf Range Drone Control Upgrade System
GSA—General Services Administration
GWEF—Guided Weapons Evaluation Facility
HQ—Headquarters
HITL—Hardware-in-the-Loop
I&M—Improvement and Modernization
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 125
IOC—Initial Operation Capability
IOT&E—Initial Operational Test and Evaluation
IPT—Integrated Product Team
IRIF—Infrared Interactive Facility
JOCAS—Job Order Cost Accounting System
JON—Job Order Number
JOSR—Job Order Status Report
LMCA—Logistics Materiel Control Activity
MAJCOM—Major Command
MIL—STD – Military Standard
MOT—Method of Test
MRTFB—Major Range and Test Facility Base
MST&E—Multiservice Test and Evaluation
NASA—National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NATO—North Atlantic Treaty Organization
NEPA—– National Environmental Policy Act
NISPOM—National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual
NNMSB—Nonnuclear Munitions Safety Board
O&M—Operations and Maintenance
OG—Operations Group
OPR—Office of Primary Responsibility
OPS—Operations
OPSEC—Operations Security
ORM—Operational Risk Management
OSD—Office of the Secretary of Defense
OSHA—Occupational Safety and Health Agency
OT—Operational Test
OT&E—Operational Test and Evaluation
PA—Public Affairs
PACAF—Pacific Air Forces
PCO—Procuring Contracting Official
PE—Programming Engineer
126 46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012
PID—Program Introduction Document
PL—Public Law
PM—Program Manager
PMB—Performance Measurement Baseline
PMD—Program Management Directive
PMEL—Precision Measurement Equipment Laboratory
PMP—Program Management Plan
PMR—Post Mission Report; Program Management Review
PO—Project Order
POC—Point of Contact
POM—Program Objective Memorandum
PPE—Personnel Protective Equipment
PRIMES—Preflight Integration of Munitions and Electronic Systems
PTO—Participating Test Organization
QLR—Quick Look Report
QOT&E—Qualification Operation Test and Evaluation
QT&E—Qualification Test and Evaluation
R&M—Reliability and Maintainability
RATSCAT—Radar Target Scatter
RDT&E—Research, Development Test and Evaluation
RF—Radio Frequency
RFA—Radio Frequency Authorization
RMB—Risk Management Board
ROM—Rough Order of Magnitude
RTO—Responsible Test Organization
RUB—Resource Utilization Board
SAF—Secretary of the Air Force
SBIR—Small Business Innovative Research
SECDEF—Secretary of Defense
SOC—Statement of Capability
SOW—Statement of Work
SPO—System Program Office
46TWP99-102 1 FEBRUARY 2012 127
STEM—Simulated Test Environment for Munitions
STINFO—Scientific and Technical Information
STU—Security Telephone Unit
T2—Technology Transfer
T&E—Test and Evaluation
TA—Test Acceptance
TAMS—Technical and Acquisition Management Support
TD—Test Directive
TDY—Temporary Duty
TE—Test Engineer
TEMP—Test and Evaluation Master Plan
TEO—Test Execution Organization
TPT—Test Process Tool
TR—Technical Report; Test Request
TSA—Technical Support Appendix
TSPI—Time-Space-Position Information
TW—Test Wing
TWES—Test Wing Enterprise System
US—United States
USAF—United States Air Force
USD[A]—– Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition
VIP—Very Important Person
WBS—Work Breakdown Structure
WSEP— – Weapon System Evaluation Program
![Introduction for the 46th Rankine Lecturedoi: 10.1680/geot.2008.58.9.693] 693 Introduction for the 46th Rankine Lecture The 46th Lecture of the British Geotechnical Society was given](https://img.dokumen.tips/doc/110x75/5af3037f7f8b9a154c8c4584/introduction-for-the-46th-rankine-lecture-doi-101680geot2008589693-693-introduction.jpg)
![[46th KUG PP] Visual Resume](https://img.dokumen.tips/doc/110x75/54b891e14a795982368b45aa/46th-kug-pp-visual-resume.jpg)
