ML20211M674

Responds to NRC 990819 Telcon Re Projected Future Growth in Civilian & Military Air Traffic,Use of Flight Termination Systems for Cruise Missiles & Info on Recent Cruise Missile Incident

ML20211M674
Person / Time
Site:	07200022
Issue date:	09/03/1999
From:	Donnell J External (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
TAC-L22462, NUDOCS 9909090174
Download: ML20211M674 (25)

Text

,

i Private Fuel Storage, t.t.c P.O. Box C4010, La Crone, W7 54602-401:

Phone 303 7417009 Fax: 303 7417806 John L. Donnell, P.E, Project Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission September 3,1999 ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 1

COMMITMENT RESOLUTION LETTER #17 DOCKET NO. 72-22 / TAC NO. L22462 PRIVATE FUEL STORAGE FACILITY PRIVATE FUEL STORAGE L.L.C.

In the August 19,1999 telephone call between Private Fuel Storage (PFS) and the NRC, the NRC asked additional questions regarding projected future growth in civilian and military air traffic, use of flight termination systems for cruise missiles, and information on a recent cruise missile incident. The NRC questions and the PFS response are f

provided below:

NRC Comments 1.

PFS should provide any available informction on the cruise missile incident of June 11,1999.

2.

PFS should include projected air traffic growth rates (civilian and military) in the aircraft crash hazard assessment for the Private Fuel Storage Facility (PFSF).

3.

PFS should address the issue of apparently conflicting information from the Air Force concernir.g use of the cruise missile Flight Termination System on the UTTR.

PFS Response PFS response to the above comments is enclosed. If you have any questions regarding this response, please contact me at 303-741-7009.

1 b

\\ (\\. g.. {J l

John L. Donnell Project Director Private Fuel Storage L.L.C.

Enclosure D

9909090174 990903 PDR ADOCK 07200022 C

PDR

nB

)

U.S. NRC 2.-

September 3,1999 Copy to (with enclosure):

Mark Delligatti-John Parkyn -'

Jay Silberg; I

Sherwin Turk

' Asadul Chowdhury -

Murray Wade '

Scott Northard Denise Chancellor Richard E. Condit -

John Paul Kennedy Joro Walker i

/

j i

j i

l 1

PFS RESPONSES TO NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 3,1999 NRC COMMENT 1: PFS should provide information on the cruise missile incident of J=c 11,1999.

PFS RESPONSE: The June 11,1999 cruise missile mishap is currently under investigation by the U.S. Air Force. The Air Force will not release any information until the Safety Investigation Board has completed its work and published its report. PFS has been advised that Part I of the Safety Investigation Report can be released upon completion of the report; the remainder of the report will be classified. PFS has sent a Freedom ofInfbnnation request to the U.S. Air Force requesting a copy of Part I of the Safety Investigation Report when it is completed as well as any other releasable documents or records pertaining to the June 11,1999 cruise missile mishap. PFS will provide the NRC Staff with any information it receives in the future regarding the cruise missile incident. PFS expects that it will be a month or more before it receives any such infonnation.

l I

ti q 4'.

[,

~ military) in the aircraft crash hazard assessment for the Private Fuel Storage Facility NRC COMMENT 2: PFS should include projected air traffic growth rates (civilian and (PFSF);

PFS RESPONSE:

Commercial Air Carriers JAdcording to the FAA's "Long-Range Aerospace Forecasts, Fiscal. Years 2015,2020 and

' 2025," FAA-APO-99-5 '(June 1999), commercial aircraft operations (the sum of air

carrier and commuter / air taxi takeoffs and landings) at all U.S. airports, towered and non-towered, are projected to increase from 28.6 million 1998 to 36.6 million in 2010, and to

'. 47.'6 million'in 2025. Thu's, U.S. commercial aviation operations are projected to increase by a factor of 1.66 by 2025. These forecasts are the products of projected annual average growth rates of 2.1 percent through 2010 and 1.8 percent from 2010 to 2025.

(Tab A, p.12)

One can apply' the growth factor of 1.66 to PFS's estimated crash impact probability for commercial aircraft on airways J-56 and V-257, in that the probability ofimpact is l

directly proportional to the number of aircraft flights on those airways and one can assume that the number of flights will increase at the same rate as the total numbers of takeoffs and landings.

In PFS's submission of August 13,1999, PFS indicated that the crash impact probabilities for aircraft flying on J-56 and V-257 were 8.4 x 10* and 5.3 x 10-',

. respectively, for the PFSF cask storage area and 2.2 x 10* and 1.4 x 10 -', respectively, for the PFSF canister transfer building (August 13,1999 submission at 43).

- Multiplying those probabilities by 1.66 yields projected crash impact probabilities for 2025 of 1.39 x 10-8 and 8.80 x 10-' for the cask storage area from aircraft in J-56 and V-

. 257, respectively, and probabilities of 3.65 x l'0* and 2.32 x 10-' for the canister transfer building from aircrall on J-56 and V-257, respectively. One can see from the August 13

submission that crashes involving aircrafl from J-56 and V-257 constitute a very small c

r-L

fraction of the total crash impact hazard to the PFSF, less than four percent. IIente, an i

1 2

il

7 f'

4 l

. increase in those probabilities ~of 66 percent represent's only a very small increase in the -

total' crash impact hazard, which remains well below I x 10.

4 General Aviation Aircraft :

'~

l

The annual number of general aviation operations (takeoffs plus landings) at all towered

- and non-towered airports in the United States is forecast by the FAA to increase from -

87.4 million in 1998 to 92.8 million in 2010 and to 99.2 million in 2025. (Tab A, p.12)

Thus general aviation operations are projected to increase by a factor of 1.14 by 2025.

L

. These forecasts are the products of a projected average annual growth rate of 0.5 percent per year from 1998 to 2025.'

If one applies the growth factor of 1.14 to. the crash impact probabilities for the PFSF that PFS provided in its August 13 submission (pg. 43), the impact probability for general

1. o 4.56 x 10 for the cask storage area and d

l

- aviation aircraft increases from 4.0 x 10 t

- from 7.1 x 10-3 to' 8.09 x 10-'8 for the canister transfer building. These increases are very small compared to the total air crash impact hazard PFS has calculated for the PFSF.

The forecast for general aviation flight operations relies not only on the assumptions of 3

- sustained economic growth and price stability, but is also heavily dependent on continued plant expansion and production by general aviation manufacturers and the success of industry programs, such as "GA Team 2000," to foster the growth in number of student

- ilots. If the general aviation industry falters in its efforts to stimulate the production of p

'new general aviation products and services, the outlook for general aviation activity at

' FAA air trafTic facilities could be considerably lower than the current projections.

1 Therefbre, the PFS projections of the hazard posed by general aviation aircraft in 2025 is believed to be conservative.

i i

i L

' Military' Aircraft L

Military air traffic is not expected to increase appreciably, if at ali, in the foreseeable

)

future, in its ofTicial"Long Range Aerospace Forecasts," the Federal Aviation Administration has specifically stated that "[t]he number of military aircrafl handled is forecast to remain constant at the 4.2 million recorded in 1998 through 2025." FAA-c l

3

s :

~-

t i

(

1 *:

APO-99-5, at 16 (Tab A), Therefore, the air crash impact probabilities provided for z military aircraft by PFS in its August 13 submission should apply throughout the license

. period of the PFSF,-

The FAA's ' forecast is consistent with, and indeed may be conservative in light of the end L L of the Cold War and competing national priorities which have produced decreases in :

defense spending, force structure and personnel for several years. Improved technology -

.. and weapons effectiveness have enhanced combat capability and actually reduced the.

require' ment for larger numbers of aircraft to produce the required results.

Since the U.S. Air Force flies the great majority of missions on the UTTR, the following

_ data is provided to illustrate the historical trend that promises no prospect of reversal in.

the near term and long term. (Tab B, pp. 51,56,64,66)

FY 92 FY 93 FY 94 FY 95 FY %

FY 97 FY 98 Total USAF Aircraft 7,640 7,182 6,815 6,663 6,394 6,330 6,228 (AD, ANG, AFRC)

USAF Aircraft Flying 2,790 2,584 2,317 2,253 2,181-2,205 2,154 11ours (Thousands) i USAF Personnel (Active 470,315.

444,351 426,327 400,409 389,001 377,385 367,470 i

Duty)

USAF 13udget (constant 97.155 90.683 83.707 81.773 79.100 77.680 79.796

$ Billions)

-)

i

l FS has not used olTicial Air Force projections of flight operations or force structure i

i because projections coucerning future years (beyond 2000) are contained in the

- Department'of Defense Program Objective Memorandum (POM) which is not releasable due to security classification.

1 4

Federal Budget Categories to ir 'lude total defense expenditures indicate that the other 4

-U.S. military services have' experienced similar reductions as well. (Tab B,pp. 58,59)

FY 92 FY 93 FY 94 -

FY 95 FY %

FY 97 FY 98

]

Defense Budget. _

371.6-348.6-327.7 309.9 -

292.8

'292.2 283.5 (constant $ Billions) 4

)

Defense Budget 4.9%.

4.5%

4.1%

3.8%

3.5%

3.4%

3.2%

Percentage of GDP Therefore,'ths foregoing historical data concerning Air Force force structure and budgets is consistent with the FAA's projection that military air traffic will remain constant over the next 20 years. Indeed, if current trends continue into the future, the FAA's projection

- will be quite conservative. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the military air 1

crash impact probabilities provided by PFS in its August 13 subinission will not increase

)

= over the license period of the PFSF.

Summary Projected growth in civilian air traffic over the license period of the PFSF will increase the total air crash impact probability at the facility by less than two percent. There is projected to be no growth in military traffic, so such will have rio effect on the impact

- probability. Thus, projected growth in air traffic will have no material effect on the crash j

- impact probability that PFS provided to the NRC Staffin its August 13 submission.

I l

5

a NRC COMMENT 3: PFS should address the issue of apparently conflicting information from the Air Force concerning use of cruise missile Flight Termination System on'the UTTR.

PFS RESPONSE: ' At the outset, PFS is aware of no Air Force statement that contradicts any Air Force statements made to PFS or any statement PFS has made to the NRC Staff 1

or the Licensing Board, in performing its cruise missile hazard assessment, PFS has not relied on any information concerning the number of times flight tennination systems

- (FTSs) have been used on the UTTR. PFS has only considered the number of cruise-missile mishaps on the UTTR and the fact that no FTS on a weapon system used on the UTTR has'ever failed.

The following is a discussion of the only potential Air Force contradiction that PFS could identify. In a July 20,1999 e-mail communication from Capt. Mary Enges-Maas, USAF, to Connie Nakahara, State of Utah,2 responding to State questions concerning cruise missiles on the UTTR, Capt. Enges-Maas stated that:

Approximately 12-15 crashes have occurred during the span of the cruise missile program. The usual cause of the crashes has been a missile anomaly. The U.S. Air Force has never had to self-destruct a missile using the remote control flight termination system (RCFTS).

.In a July 22,1999 e-mail communication from Capt. Enges-Maas to Ms. Nakahara,3 Capt. Enges-Maas stated that:

In addition to the 19 crashes [of Air Launched and Advanced Cruise Missiles], two other Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missiles have crashed.

2 Exhibit A to Supplemental Declaration of Major General John Matthews, U.S. Air Force (Retired) State of Utah's Response to PFS's Motion for Summary Disposition of Utah K, dated July 27,1999.

3 Exhibit B to Supplemental Declaration of Gen. Matthews.

6 La

Only two cms were terminated using the flight termination system in addition to the 21 mishaps above.

I It is unclear whether the statements by Capt. Enges-Maas are contradictory or whether they are consistent in that they rely on the difference between 1) the tennination of a missile flight through the use of an FTS generally and 2) the use of a remote controlled FTS. As PFS described in its June 30 submission (p. 27), and as the Air Force described in the accident report concerning the December 1997 cruise missile mishap on the UTTR, Accident Investigation Board Report, United States Air Force AGM-129 Advanced Cmise Missile (10 December 1997)(p. 7)(Tab C),4 the FTS on a missile that has the capabiFty ofleaving the range can be activated either automatically, when the FTS fails to receive a signal indicating that the missile is properly flying its course, or manually, by a range safety officer at Mission Control at Hill AFB or aboard the Airborne Range Instrumentation Aircraft on the UTTR. Thus, it is possible that Capt. Enges-Maas was referring to the manual (i.e., remote control) activation of the FTS in her July 20 e-mail and the automatic activation of the FTS in her July 22 e-mail. However, since PFS was neither a party nor privy to those communications, it is very difficult for PFS to specifically and accurately identify the cause of this potential contradiction.

In any event, neither of the statements contradicts the point made by PFS in its June 30 submission (p. 27), and earlier, that the Air Force has stated unequivocally, and without contradiction, that "[t]he UTTR has never experienced a[n] FTS failure." June 30 submission, Attachment E. Therefore it remains reasonable to rely on the presence of FTSs on cruise missiles when assessing the potential hazard they pose to the PFSF.

4 Exhibit 3 to Declaration of James Cole. Jr., PFS Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention Utah K, dated June 7,1999.

i 7

b t

e 9

Tab A l

l l

l l

I

/

FAA-APO-99-5 FAA LONG-RANGE AEROSPACE FORECASTS FISCAL YEARS 2015,2020 AND 2025 OFFICE OF-AVIATION POLICY AND PLANS JUNE 1999

c

. D. Total Avjation Activity Total.ci,vil aircraft activity at towered and non-towered airports (based on projections _ for just under 4,000 public 'use airports in the Terminal Area Forecast database),is forecast to reach 142.8 million by the year 2025, an average annual growth rate of 0.8 percent over the activity level forecast for

-2010 (129.4'million operations). This-represents an average annual growth race of 0.9 percent over the 116.1 million total aircraft operations recorded in j

1998.

]

Commercial aircraft operations (the. sum of air carrier and commuter / air taxi) at all U.S.

airporta, towered or non-towered, are projected to increase from 28.6 million in 1998 to 36.6 million in ' 2010, and to 47.6 million in 2025.

1These forecasts imply an average annual growth rate of 2.1 percent over the immediate forecast period, and 1.8 percent over the extended forecast period.

The number of general aviation operations at towered and non-towered airports

)

is forecast to increase from 87.4 million in 1998 to 92.8 million in 2010 and to 99.2 million in 2025.

The average annual growth rate for both the j

immediate and extended forecast periods is 0.5 percent. Much of the growth is j

the result-of increased use of the turbine fleet for. business / corporate -

/

related1 flying.

1 1

1 I

12

l B. Instrument Operations Instrument operatiens at combined FAA and centract towered airports are forecast to total 63.9 million in 2010 and 82.9 million in 2025, average annual growth rates of 2.1 and. 1.8

percent, respectively, during the l

immediate and extended forecast periods.

Mest of the growth is expected to come from ccmmercial activity, which is projected to grow 2.6 percent 1

annually during the immediate forecast period and 2.2 percent annually during the extended forecast period.

Air carrier instrument activity is forecast to. grow 2.5 percent annually over the 27-year forecast period while commuter / air taxi activity is forecast to increase at a 2.2 percent average i

annual rate during the same time period.

General aviation activity is projected to increase at a relatively slower pace over the forecast period, averaging 1.7 percent through the immediate forecast period and 1.3 percent during extended forecast periods.

Military activity is forecast to remain constant at the 3.4 million operations recorded in 1998 throughout the 27-year forecast period.

1 Commercial activity is expected to increase from 53.4 percent of total instrument activity at combined FAA and contract towers in 1998 to 60.1 per-cent by the year 2025.

C. ARTCC Aircraft Handled The number of aircraft handled at FAA en route traffic control centers is forecast to reach 56.7 million in 2010 and 76.5 million in 2025, an average annual growth rate of 2.3 percent for the 1998-2010 time period and 2.0 percent for the 2010-2025 time period.

Much of the growth occurs in the number of commercial aircraft handled, which increases by 2.7 and 2. 3 per-cent, respectively, over the two forecast periods.

The number of air carrier aircraft handled increases by an. average annual rate of 2.6 percent over the 27-year forecast period--2.8 and 2.4

percent, respectively, over the immediate and extended time periods.

The number of commuter / air taxi aircraft handled is forecast to increase by 2.3 percent annually during the immediate forecast period and 2.1 percent over the extended forecast period--

2.2 percent over the entire 27-year period.

The number of general aviation aircraft handled at FAA en route centers increases at a slower rate over the two forecast periods, 1.9 percent annually over the immediate 12-year period and 1.5 percent over the extended l

15-year period.

The number of military aircraft handled is forecast to remain constant at the 4.2 million recorded in 1998 through 2025.

By the end of the 27-year forecast period, commercial activity is expected to account for 76.9 percent of the total center activity compared to 70.1 per-cent in 1993.

f 16

0 0

D Tab B 1

]

I j

l I

I i

m E!"

'1558

=-

g-e

=

i c-q r

p q

b l

r a ;

=

g j-M

.r M

L E

t n.

ne s--

-e L

Y

.w e

x.

r

.e d%

.2

-a

+

y~ n.. -: _

Q

.[

' ~ ~.

~ ~.

Y.,

W

=

g i

f

\\

m 1

f f

....e 4

-- Y.,,i ~

• f ~,.

j#

v-=

a c.,-

p w

j, y..-

(

/

a :,

u:

^

-g/'e,.

--,!.a

' ;, '9

'i.

yp s

's?

t-t; 2

[

l L

__3

,[

' /,b

[f d -

g j-L w

g 4

{

E g.

/t,

l..

{

1,w,p 1

ht,f g

/

u L

f u

b 5 '

t1 A

l c

b;.

e e

e'

=-

P-O Et.

E t.

P C

=

L-

R?

l' Air Fcres P;rsannel Str:ngth AcN NJ,gppacgtgraphics j

ss or sept. 30,1998) gc Year Strength Year Strength Year Strength e

5 S

To I

E E

1907 3

1938 21,089 1969 862,062 I

3 0

6 1908 13 ' 1939 23,455 1970 791,078 o

0 O

1909 27 1940 51,165 1971 755,107 1910 11 1941 152,125 1972 725,635 Officers 1911 23 1942 764.415 1973 690,999 1912 51 1943 2,197,114 1974 643,795 General 274 8

7 8

1913 114 1944 2,372,292 1975 612.551 Colonel 3,815 144 270 185 1914 122 1945 2.282,259 1976 585,207 Lieutenant Colonel 10.418 717 1,304 184 1915 208 1946 455,515 1977 570,479 Major 15,612 899 2,279 188 1916 311 1947 305.827 1978 569,491 Captain 27,523 1,642 5,091 50 1917 1.218 1948

' 387,730 1979 559,450 First Lieutenant 7,414 526 1,595 16 1918 195,023 1949 419.347 1980 557,969 Second Lieutenant 6,836 475 1,425 6

1919 25,603 1950 411.277 1981 570.302 Total 71,892 4,411 11,971 637 1920 9.050 1951 788,381 1982 582.845 1921 11,649 1952 973,474 1983 592,044 Enlisted 1922 9,642 1953 977,593 1984 597,125 1923 9,441 1954 947,918 1985 601,515 Chief Master Sergeant 1924 10,547 1955 959.946 1986 608,199 of the Air Force 1

1925 9,670 1956 909,958 1987 607,035 Chief Master Sergeant 2,946 570 284 56 1926 9,674 1957 919,835 1988 576,446 Senior Master Sergeant 5,896 1,066 682 168 1927 10,078 1958 871,156 1989 570,880 Master Sergeant 29,606 6,044 3.281 1,241 1928 10.549 1959 840,028 1990 535,233 Technical Sergeant 38,280 7,735 4,481 1,774 1929 12,131 1960 814.213 1991 510.432 Staff Sergeant 73,461 13,402 10,720 4,066 1930 13,531 1961 820,490 1992 470,315 Sergeant' Senior Airman 67,709 10,487 15,190 4.892 1931 14,780 1962 883.330 1993 444,351 Airman First Class 44,600 7,660 11,633 5,150 Airman 17,698 3,222 4,551 1,901 1932 15,028 1963 868,644 1994 426,327 Airman Basic 11,393 1,946 2,720 1,219 1933 15,099 1964 855,802 1995 400,409 1934 15.861 1965 823,633 1996 389,001 Total 291,590 52,132 53,542 20,467 1933 16.247 1966 886,350 1997 377,385 1936 17,233 1967 897,426 1998 367,470 Total personnel 363,482 56,543 65,513 21,104 1937 19,147 1968 904.759 1999 370,882 Average ages of military personnel: Officers 35, Enlisted 28 1999 number is programmed.

TW M MH W Wt (As of Sept.30, 1998)

General Schedule /

Wage Grade Wage Grade Wage Grade Air Force Civillan Personnet:

i Other Leader Supervisory Average Age and Length of Service vera length of service i

Grade Force Grade Force Grade Force Grade Force y,

1 1

1 4

1 0

1 9

General schedule 17 years 2

48 2

228 2

5 2

23 Federal wage system 18 years 3

664 3

277 3

4 3

29 Average age 47 years 4

3,870 4

164 4

0 4

50 5

10,382 5

1,225 5

18 5

69 6

6,633 6

1,086 6

34 6

138 7

8,845

.7 1,654 7

44 7

210 inciuoes acun me s cwans wan permanent 8

1,209 8

3,565 8

102 8

253 9

12,497 9

3,466 9

260 9

912 Excludes Tine 32 technicians. temporary 10 792 10 13,782 10 730 10 1,194 employees, and tomontiocai nationais.

11 16,156 11 3,791 11 111 11 448

• scientific and Tecnnical 12 18,937 12 1,589 12 43 12 262

• Senior Executive Service (includes ES, IE, and i

13 10,997 13 207 13 0

13 148 IP).

I l

14 3,244 14 60 14 0

14 180 15 1,237 15 2

15 0

15 115

)

16 0

16 0

16 0

16 65 j

17 0

17 0

17 0

17 36 18 0

18 0

18 0

18 17 Total 31,100 Total 1,351 Total 4,158 S

OthIr 250 l

Total 95,960 AIR FORCE Magazine / May 1999 51

! Budgets 1

Tmms E ilamed Another difference concerns the value specific year, often the present one, is

)

Funding levels can be expressed in sev-of money. When funding is in current or chosen &S a baseline for constant dottars.

crat ways. Budget authority is the value then year dollars, no adjustment for in.

Normally, Congress first authorizes pay-of new obligations that the federal gov-flation has taken place. This is the actual ment, then appropriates it. Authoriza-crnment is authorized to incur. Thw amount of dollars that has been or is to be tion is an act of Congress that estab-include some obligations to be met in spent, budgeted, or forecast. When fund-lishes or continues a federal program or later years. Figures can also be expressed ing is expressed in constant dollars, or agency and sets forth guidelines to which in outleys (actual expenditures, some of real dollars, the effect of inflation has it must adhere. Appropriation is an act of r!hich are covered by amounts that were been f actored out to make direct compari-Congress that enables federal agencies authorized in previous years).

sons between budget years possible. A to spend money for specific purposes.

Air Force Budget-A 10-Year Perspective (Budget authority in current and constant s milhons)

Current dollars FY90 FY91 FY92 FY93 FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 Mditary personnel

$21,777 $22,755 $21.381 $20,141 $18,168 $19.602 $19.309 $19.186 $19.111 $19.451 Operations and maintenance 25,160 29,061 22,816 22,179 24.525 24,561 23,519 22,728 25,174 24.227 Procurement 30.276 24.041 23.249 21,803 17,716 16.529 15.558 14.247 15.258 17,494 RDT&E 13,507 12.207 12,867 12,979 12,021 11,787 12,427 14,017 14,265 13,683 Military construction 1.453 1,117 1,200 1,053 1,554 816 1.285 1.567 1.537 1.372 Family housing 870 888 1,112 1,212 923 1,106 1,124 1,135 1.114 1,086 Rev. and mgmt. funds 121 1.672 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 790 234 31 Trust and receipts

-274 485

-286

-221

-332

-470 231

-453

-409 439 Total 92,890 91,257 82,340 79,146 74,575 73,933 72,992 73,218 76,284 76,905 Constant FYOO dollars Military personnei 29.829 29,754 27,153 24,498 21.567 22,719 21,875 21,14? 20.447 20.193 Operations and maintenance 31,603 32,813 26,778 25.308 27,397 27,181 25,450 24,000 25.815 24.455 Procurement 36.058 27,819 26.276 24,147 19.264 17.662 16,380 14,824 15.710 17,775 RDT&E 16,339 14,269 14,663 14,468 13,153 12,664 13,105 14,561 14.679 U.906 Mditary construction 1,724 1,289 1,354 1,166 1,688 871 1.354 1,634 i $35 0 94 Family housing 1,050 1,025 1,259 1,342 1,001 1,180 1,177 1,17a 1,139 1,100 Rev. and mgmt. funds 148 1,961 n/a n/a n/a n/a

n. a 814 240 31 Trust and receipts 335

-569

-326

-246 362 503 242 467 419

-446 Total 116,476 108,361 97,155 90,683 83,707 81,773 79,100 77,680 79,196 74,408 Percentage real growth Mditary personnel 2.0

-0.3

-8.7

-9.8 12.0 5.3

-3.7 34 3.3 1.2 Operations and maintenance 1.9 4.1

-18.4

-5.5 8.3 0.8

-6.4 5.7 7.6 5.3 Procurement

-5.6 22.9 5.5

-8.1 20.2 8.3

-7.3

-9.5 6.0 13.1 RDT&E 11.6 12.9 2.8 1.3

-9.1 3.7 3.5 11.1 0.8 5.3 Mditary construction 2.9 25.2 5.0 13.9 44.8

-48.4 55.5 20.7 3.0

-12.1 Famdy housing B.9

-2.3 22.8 6.6 25.4 17.9

-0.3

-0.3

-2.9 3.4 Total 4,6 7,0 10.3 6.7 7,7 2.3 3.3 1,8 2.0 1.0 Air Force Major Force Programs (Teta! ochgation Autnority m FYoc coastsat 5 bHhons)

FY90 FY91 FY92 FY93 FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 Forces Strategic Forces

$15.6

$14.6 $12.2

$9.7

$6.2

$5.1

$5.1

$3.9

$4.4

$4.1 General Purpose Forces 25.6 24.4 20.4 18.4 17.6 16.9 16.9 16.6 16.8 16.5 l

Airlift Forces 6.8 5.9 7.0 8.1 8.7 9.1 8.7 8.6 9.0 9.8 Guard and Reserve Forces 7.4 6.5 6.9 7.2 7.3 7.5 7.2 7.1 7.4 7.5 Special Operations Forces 1.4 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 Total 56.8 51.7 46.8 43.8 40.2 39.0 38.4 36.6 38.0 38.3 l

Support Intelligence & Communications

$21.6

$20.1

$21.5 $21.2

$20.6 $18.0

$18.4

$18.2 $19.0

$19.0 Research & Development 10.9 9.4 9.0 84 7.5 8.4 8.5 8.1 8.1 7.2 i

Central Supply & Maintenance 12.2 10.6 7.2 6.5 4.5 4.5 4.2 4.0 4.0 4.2 Train >ng. Mescal. & General Personnel 12.2 13.9 9.6 9.4 8.7 9.0 8.9 84 84 8.5 Administration & Other 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.4 i

Total 58.5 55.6 48.8 47.0 42.8 41,3 41,5 40.2 41.0 40.3 AIR FORCE Magazine / May 1999 f ;-

56 wi k

r.

k Explanatory Note i

' Data for 1962-98 are historical. Data for 1999-2000 are pro.

jections. These four tables are based on "The Economic and Budget Outlook: Fiscal Years 2000-09,* published by the Congressional Budget Office, January 1999. (Constant dollar figures are derived.)

Federal Budget Categories Federal Budget Categories Current $ billions.

Constant FYOO $ billions t-I Year Total Deficit Entitlements Defense Year Total Deficit Entitlements Defense Outlays Outlays 1962

$106.8

$5.9

$34.7

$52.6 1962 609.3 41.3 198.0 300.1 1963 111.3 4.0 36.2.

53.7 1963 626.9 27.7 203.9 302.4 1964 118.5 6.5 38.9 55.0 1964 658.8 44.4 216.3 305.8 1965 118 2 1.6 39.7 51.0 1965 646.8 10.8 217.2 279.1 1966 134.5 3.1 43.4 59.0 1966 715.3 20.2 230.8 313.8 1967 157.5 12.6 50.9 72.0 1967 812.4 79.8 262.5 371.4 1968 178.1 27,7 59.7 82.2 1968 881.6 168.4 295.5 406.9 1969 183.6 0.5 64.7 82.7 1969 861.5 2.9 303.6 388.0 i

1970 195.6 8.7 72.6 81.9 1970 868.3 47.4 322.3 363.6 1971 210.2 26.1 86.9 79.0 1971 893.8 136.3 369.5 335.9 i,

l 1972 230.7 26.4 100.9 79.3 1972 950.5 133.6 415.7 326.7 l

1973 245.7 15.4 116.1 77.1 1973 953.2 73.4 450.4 299.1 1974 269.4 8.0 131.0 80.7 1974 941.6 34.3 457.9 282.1 1975 332.3 55.3 169.6 87.6 1975 1,064.6 217.6 543.3 280.6 1976 371.8 70.5 189.4 89.9 1976 1,125.8 262.2 573.5 272.2 1977 409.2 49.8 204.0 97.5 1977 1,163.4 173.9 580.0 277.2 19" 458.7 54.9 227.7 104.6 1978 1,212.1 178.2 601.7 276.4 504.0 38.7 247.3 116.8 1979 1,196.6 112.8 587.1 277.3 590.9 72.7 291.5 134.6 1980 1,236.0 186.8 609.7 281.5 1981 678.2 74.0 339.6 150.0 1981 1,286.1 172.3 644.0 299.6 1982 745.8 120.1 370.9 185.9 1982 1,331.8 263.4 662.3 332.0 1983 808.4 208.0 410.7 209.9 1983 1,398.8 442.0 710.6 363.2 1984-851.9 185.7 405.8 228.0 1984 1,413.3 378.3 673.2 378.2 1985 946.4 221.7 448.4 253.1 1985 1,515.5 436.0 718.0 405.3 1986 990.5 238.0 462.0 273.8 1986 1,556.5 459.3 726.0 430.3 1987 1.004.1 169.3 474.4 282.5 1987 1,523.1 315.4 719.6 428.5 1988-1,064.5 194.0 505.3 290.9 1988 1,551.1 347.2 736.3 423.9 1989 1,143.7 205.2 549.6 304.0 1989 1,590.2 350.4 764.2 422.7 1990 1.253.2 277.8 627.3 300.1 1990 1,653.2 450.0 827.5 395.9 1991 1,324.4 321.6 702.6 319.7 1991 1,676.7 500.0 889.5 404.7 1992 1,381.7 340.5 716.6 302.6 1992 1,696.6 513.5 879.9 371.6 1993 1.409.4 300.4 736.8 292.4 1993 1,680.2 439.8 878.4 348.6 1994 1,461.7 258.8 784.0 282.3 1994 1,696.8 368 9 910.1 327.7 i

'995 1,515.7 226.3 818.2 273.6 1995 1,716.5 314.7 926.6 309.9

)

1 1996 1,560.5 174.0 857.5 266.0 1996 1,717.5 235.2 943.7 292.8 l

1997 1,601.2 103.3 896.3 271.9 1997 1,720.9 136.3 963.3 292.2 I

'1998 1,651.4 29.2 938 6 269.6 1998 1,736.7 37.7 987.1 283.5 1999 1,707.0 19 0 982.0 276.7 1999 1,751.4 23.9 1,007.5 283.9 2000 1.739.0 7.0 1,028.0 274.1 2000 1,739.0 7.0 1.028.0 274.1

'58 AIR FORCE Magazine / May 1999 l

'i

O

• Fsd;ral Budgst Outlay Catsgoriss Percentage 5 of GDP inflation Rates 14 -

25 c.

. hp 12 -

$, ? JQ 20 Q

%]g ' t 10 -

s.(

g na

$8 15 E

~

10 E

E 4.

Entitlements 5

2.

0 O

, i,, i i( l i l i i l i i i 1 g g g i ; g i i ;;iig g j j ;, g

'62

'72

'82

'92

'00

'62

'72

'82

'92

'00 cpl. Consumer Pnce ledes Year Total Deficit Entitlernents Defense Year

% change Outlays 1962 18.8 1.0 6.1 9.3 1962 1.0 1963 18.6 0.7 6.0 9.0 1963 1.3 1964 18.5 1.0 6.1 8.6 1964 1.3 1965 17.2 0.2 5.8 7.4 1965 1.6 1966 17.8 0.4 5.7 7.8 1966 2.9 1967 19.4 1.6 6.3 8.9 1967 3.1 1968 20.5 3.2 6.9 9.4 1968 4.2 1969 19.4 0.1 6.8 8.7 1969 5.5 1970 19.4 0.9 7.2 8.1 1970 C.7 1971 19.5 2.4 8.1 7.3 1971 4.4 1972 19.6 2.2 8.6 6.7 1972 3.2 1973 18.8 1.2 8.9 5.9 1973 6.2 1974 18.7 0.6 9.1 5.6 1974 11.0 1975 21.4 3.6 10.9 5.6 1975 9.1 1976 21.5 4.1 10.9 5.2 1976 5.8 1977 20.8 2.5 10.4 4.9 1977 6.5 1978 20.7 2.5 10.3 4.7 1978 7.6 1979 20.2 1.6 9.9 4.7 1979 11.3 1980 21 7 2.7 10.7 5.0 1980 13.5 1981 22.3 2.4 11.1 5.2 1981 10.3 l

1982 23 2 3.7 11.5 5.8 1982 6.2 1983 23.6 6.1 12.0 6.1 1983 3.2 1984 22.3 4.9 10.6 6.0 1984 4.3 1

1985 23.0 5.4 10.9 6.2 1985 3.6 1986 22.7 5.4 10.6 6.3 1986 1.9 I

1987 21.8 3.7 10.3 6.1 1987 3.6 4

1988 21.5 3.9 10.2 5.9 1988 4.1 I

1989 21.4 3.8 10.3 5.7 1989 4.8 1990 22.1 4.9 11.0 5.3 1990 5.4 I

l 1991 22.6 5.5 12.0 5.5 1991 4.2 1992 22.5 5.5 11.7 4.9 1992 3.1 1

1993 21.8 4.6 11.4 4.5 1993 3.0 i

1994 21.3 3.8 11.4 4.1 1994 2.7 i

1995 21.1 3.1 11.4 38 1995 2.5 j

1996 20.7 2.3 11.4 3.5 1996 2.9 1997 20.1 1.3 11.2 3.4 1997 2.4

)

1998 19.6 0.3 11.2 3.2 1998 2.2 1999 19.5 0.2 11.2 3.1 1999 2.5 2000 19.1 0.1 11.3 3.0 2000 2.6 s

59 AIR FORCE Magazine / May 1999

m (.

Annual Pay f r Fed:ral Civilians (Eff.ciive Jan. i,1999)

General Schedule Grade Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7 Step 8 Step 9 Step 10 GS1

$13.362

$13,807 $14.252

$14.694 $15,140

$15,401

$15,838

$16,281 $16.299 $16,718 GS-2 15,023 15,380 15.878 16.299 16,482 16,967 17,452 17,937 18,422 18,907 GS 3 ~

16.392 16.938 17,484 18.030 18,576 19,122 19.668 20.214 20.760 21.306 G S-4 18,401 19,014 19,627 20.240 20,853 21,466 22,079 22.692 23.305 23,918 i

GS 5 20.588 21.274 21,960 22.646 23,332 24,018 24,704 25,390 26,076 26,762 l

GS 6 22,948 23.713 24,478 25,243 26,008 26,773 27,538 28,303 29,068 29,833 l

GS 7 25.501 26,351 27,201 28.051 28,901 29.751 30.601 31,451 32,301 33.151 j

GS 8 28,242 29,183 30,124 31,065 32,006 32,947 33,888 34,829 35,770 36,711 GS 9 31,195 32.235 33,275 34,315 35,355 36,395 37,435 38,475 39,515 40.555 i

GS 10 34,353 35.498 36.643 37,788 38,933 40,078 41,223 42,368 43.513 44,658 GS 11 37,744 39.002 40,260 41,518 42,776 44.034 45,292 46,550 47.808 49.066

)

GS 12 45,236 46,744 48,252 49,760 51,268 52,776 54.284 55,792 57,300 58,808 j.

GS 13 53,793 55,586 57,379 59,172 60,965 62,758 64,551 66.344 68.137 69,930 GS 14 63,567 65,686 67,805-69,924 72,043 74,162 76,281 78,400 80,519 82.638 4

l GS-15 74.773 77,265 79,757 82,249 84,741 87,233 89.725 92,217 94,709 97,201 Senior Executive Service ES 1 ES 2 ES 3 ES 4 ES 5 ES-6

$102,300

$107,100

$112,000

$118.000

$118,400

$118,400 NOTE: Since January 1994 locality. based comparability payments have been applied to General Schedule (GS) and Senior Executive Service (ES) positions in the cont,nental United States In othof words. pay la hsgher in areas of the US where nonfederal salaries are higher. Because there are 30 locality pay areas rocc9maed by the Office of Personnel Management, there are in effect 30 different GS and ES pay schedules based on the schedule above. Locality pay adjustments do not apply to emptoyees already receiving special salary rates that exceed the locakty rate nor to overseas employees.

Subsistence Allowance (Effective Jan.1,1999)

(Effective Jan.1,1999)

Cash /in Kind Pay With

' Without Crade Dependents Dependente Officers 157.26/ month O-10

$1,081.20

$878.40 Enlleted M' mbers E 1 <4 Months All Other Enlisted e

0-9 1,081.20 078.40 When on leave or authorized to O8 1,081.20 878.40 mess separately

$6.93/ day

$7.50/ day z

O7 1,081.20 878.40 I

When rations in kind are not O6 973.50 805.80 available

$7.81/ day

$8.46/ day 0-5 938.40 776.10 0-4 827.10 719.10 When assigned to duty under 0-3 684.30 576.60 emergency conditions where no US mess facilities are available

$10.36/ day

$11.21/ day 0-2 584.40 457.20 0-1 522.60 385.20 j

0-3E 735.30 622.50 0 2E 663.60 528.90 0-1 E '

613.20 455.10 E9 702.60 533.10 E-8 647.70 442,50 E-7 601,50 417.90 E-6 555.60 378.30

' E5 499.80 348,90 E4 434.40 303.60 E3 404.40 297.60 E2 385.20 241.80 E1 385.20 215 70 AIR FORCE Magazine / May 1999 61

ll.

~

$i Total Number cf USAF Aircr;tt in Service Oy:r Tima b

a.., se ce,

..s>

l.

[

Type of aircraft FY92 FY93 FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98

(

Bomber 248 225 178 183 185 177 179 Tanker 478 391 328 325 314 310 317 Fighter / interceptor / attack 2,000 1,848 1,781 1,750 1,637 1,631 1,613 Reconnaissance / electronic warfare 238 241 225 318 257 252 211 i

l Cargo / transport 794 749 733 690 654 612 610 i

Search & rescue (fixed wing) 56 84 34 12 9

9 9

Helicopter (includes rescue) 206 203 189 123 174 178 165 Trainer 1,313 1,150 1,188 1,205 1,193 1,234 1,247 Utility / observation /other 89 95 107 104 98 98 96 Total active duty 5,422 4,986 4,761 4,710 4,521 4,501 4,447 Air National Guard 1,694 1,653 1,586 1,461 1,426 1,375 1,351 i

AFRC 524 543 468 462 447 454 430 Total active duty, ANO, and AFRC 7,640 7,182 6,815 6,633 6,394 6,330 6,228 Total aircraft, including foreign government owned 7,733 7.276 7,028 6,725 6,476 6.412 6,327 l

Age of the Active Duty Fleet

)

(As of Sept. 30,1 98)

A, e in Year =,

0-3 3-6 6-9 9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24 24+

Average A/OA 10 13 177 27 16.8 B1 58 15 11.3 B2 7

10 3

1 4.1 B 52 85 36.8 C5 43 7

31 16.8 J

C9 3

20 27.5 KC 10 1

11 30 17 13.7 C-12 4

8 1

21 19 i

C-17 20 19 4

3.1 i

l C-18s 2

3 11.6 C 20 1

1 8

2 1

10.9 C 21 76 13.7 C 25 2

7.9 C 27 2

5 6.4 C 32 2

0.3 C 1308 16 17 13 7

49 198 26 j

C 135$

296 36.7 C-137' 1

2 2

19.6 C 141b 122 31.9 E3 3

8 13 8

18.8 E-4 2

2 24.3 E8 4

1 2.6 F 15 36 118 118 100 140 100 3

1 12.9 F 16 22 192 308 165 88 8

9 8.1 F 22 2

0.7 F-117e 56 7.4 G3 3

7.6 G4 4

1 1

3 5

13 G7 4

1 4

13 G9 4

11.6 G 10 1

3.6 G 11 2

3.2 H1 63 27.7 H 53 1

5 1

39 25.9 H 60 5

30 11 2

8 9.5 RQ 1 4

1.2 SR 71 2

32.2 T1 57 102 21 3.9 T3 14 96 3.6 T 37 418 35.2 T 38 509 31.5 T-39 3

37.6 T-41 3

28.5 T 43 11 24.5 U-2 1

9 13 8

4 15 UV 18 1

2 14.5 Total 134 488 573 455 367 377 155 89 1809 19.7 Percent 8 3%

11 %

13%

10%

8%

8%

3%

2%

41 %

• includes Ec ts.

• includes ali types. aincludes YF 117. ' Percentages are roundad 64 AIR FORCE Magazine / May 1999

[._

. l

r i

Y i

\\

E I

USAF Aircraft Flying H2urs

}<

(in thousands, as of Sept. 30.19981 i

l l

FY92 FY93 FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 Active duty 2,195 1.993 1,750 1,709 1,657 1,680 1,644 ANG 441 442 412 403 380 375 361 AFRC 154 149 155 141 144 150 149 Total 2,790 2,584 2,317 2,253 2,181 2,205 2,154

'i c

l USAF Squadrons by Mission Type (As of sept. 30,1998)

I FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 l

I Active forces i

Alrcraft per Active Duty

! l Bomber 12 10 10 10 10 USAF Squadron Air refueling 25 24 23 23 25 Ms of Sept 30,19981 Strategic command & control 0

1 1

1 2

Fighter 53 54 54 54 47 Aircraft Number Reconnaissance 0

4 4

4 0

A/OA 10 2,4,6,9,12,17 j

Electronic warf are 4

3 3

3 3

B 1B 2,6,12,16 Special Operations Forces 16 15 16 16 13 B2 8

Ground theater air control 5

5 5

5 8

B 52 1,12 Airborne theater air control 7

7 7

9 8

C-5 6,16 Weather 0

0 1

0 0

C-9A 1,3,4,11 Rescue 6

6 7

7 7

C-17 7,12 Theater airlift 11 12 12 13 11 130 8,10,14,16,18,20 j

Long range airlift 16 15 15 17 20 C

H Special mission 2

2 2

2 2

HC 130 pin 9

)

Aeromedical airlif t 3

3 3

3 3

MC-130 4,5,7,8,10 ICBM 19 14 14 14 14 MH 53J 5,20 i

Space operations 6

9 10 10 10 MH-60G 3, 8 l

Space communications 3

3 2

1 1

KC 10A 12,15 Space warning 10 11 9

8 8

KC 135 6,9,10,11,12,15,24 Space surveillance 7

9 7

6 6

C 141 B 6,9,16 Space launch 5

5 5

5 5

E-3 2,25 5

4,6.8,18,67 Range 2

2 2

2 2

F 15E 1,2,3,5,18,24 Total 212 214 212 213 205 F 16 7,8.9,18,24,155 Reserve forces F-117A 1,9,18 1,

6,7,8 ANG Selected Reserve 89 89 87 88 88 AFRC 59 48 48 60 62 ro, sorne types of a.rcrati squao ons vary Space operations 1

1 5

1 3

Tc!al 149 138 136 149 153 Grand total 361 352 348 362 358 Air National Guard Air Defense Unit Fin Flashes Description Aircraft Unit and Location Minuteman over Massachusetts F-15A/B 102d FW, Otis ANGB. Mass.

Red stripe with

• Happy Hooligans" logo F-16 A/B 119th FW, Hector LAP. N D.

Dark gray bison's skull against prairie / mountain profile F 16A/B 120th FW, Great Falls IAP. Mont."

Subdued hawk with banner in talons F 15A'B 123d FS (142d FW). Portland IAP, Ore.

Gray lightning bolt F-15A'B 125th FW. Jacksonville LAP, Fla Black falcon with talons extended and " California" logo F 16C/D 144th FW. Fresno Air Terminal. Cahf.

Texas star on subdued jagged sinpes with " Houston" logo F 16C/D 147th FW, Ellington Field. Texas a Stars of Little Dipper constellation and " Duluth" logo F-16A/B 148th FW, Duluth IAP Minn Black falcon with " Vermont' on subdued stripe F 16C/D 158th FW, Burlington IAP Vt.*

Stylized " Jersey Devil" and "New Jersey"1000 F 16C/D 177th FW, Atlantic City LAP. N.J.*

Subdued eagle and " Oregon" logo F-15 A/B 114th FS (173d FW), Klamath Falls IAP. Ore?

Starburst state fiag and " Arizona' logo F 16A'B 162d FW, Tucson IAP, Ariz?

I acenerai pwpose unos rne io,ge A<r De'ense og

1. ANG trawng unds

(

66 AIR FORCE Magazine / May 1999 i

.}

9 8

i I

e G

9 Tab C

. w.,

4.. a us.

P.02 fs A,

ACCIDENT TSVESTIGATION BOARD ~.

REPORT UNITED STATES AIRFORCE AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missile Serial Number 90-0061 3;

34. 77 3 ;

u.. :.

<g y

e

~

5.

4

.__.J 1

m 10 December 1997 Dugway Proving Ground, Utah 1

Volume I ofIII

^

7 e

UT-39450

p,e4

=~B-22-1900 04:22

. e m

Key'capabilitics of the Utah Test and Training Range used to support cruise missile tests are optical tracking, radar nacking, radio and telemetry relay, and ground stations capable of transmitting either.

remote control or flight termination instructions to the missile.3' Test functions are remotely monitored and operated from the test Mission Control Center at Hill Air Force Base, Utah.3' 388th Range Squadron cruise missile testing procedures developed by Air Force Flight Test Center require operational hazard analyses and formal safety reviews of all testgrograms as well as safety reviews of particular test nussions.

(4). Missile Termination / Command and Control.

(a). Termination. Before a bomber launches a test cruise missile, the Mission Contml Center verifies that the missile's remote control and flight termination systems are working property.33 At all times throughout the flight the cruise missile flight termination system must detect a signal that in efrect permits-the missile to keep flying.3' If the missile does not detect the signal for a preset time, the flight termination system activates, causing the missile to tumble and crash." This arrangement is functionally equivalent to a dead-man switch. The missile trummits measurements which confirm it is receiving the authorizing signal (and the strength of that signal) to Mission Control throughout flight 3' Safety officers can also activate the flight termination system in case of need at any time.3' The Range Safety Officer sit Mission Control and the Airborne Range Instrumentation Aircraft are both capable of terminating missile flight almost instantly.38 (b). Comunand and Control. The missile also relays any carries out those instructions.3' ystem receives at instructiorsits remote controls j

Mission Control at Hill Air Force I

"O.4&A-3,0.4J 38 40 O.1.D-116 8' O.4.5 2 3,0.4J 38 -39 30.1.3-17 ff,0.1.P 306,-308.-314,-318 0.l.3 -22 24.O.l.C-51. 60. 65, 69.O.l.D.111. O.2.M-74 75. O.2.N-91 -93 88 i' O.t.C $7,0.1.5-2s,0.2.N-89 i

, is o.l.518,0.1.C 49,-84 3' O.l.5 23 -24,0.1.C-5L -60. -68,-69 8'O.l.B.23.O t.C.41.O.1J 318 O.2389 as 0.1 A23 -2s,0.1J-320 32 L 8' O.t.B 22. O.1.C 60, 48. -75 7

eJT-39458

]

-