Appendix_3_AFI_11-502v2.pdf

BY ORDER OF THE

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE

AIR FORCE INSTRUCTION 11-502, Volume 2

26 APRIL 2012

Flying Operations

SMALL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS

STANDARDIZATION/EVALUATION

PROGRAM

COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY

ACCESSIBILITY: Publications and forms are available on the e-Publishing website at www.e-Publishing.af.mil for downloading or ordering.

RELEASABILITY: There are no releasability restrictions on this publication.

OPR: HAF/A3O-AS

Certified by: AF/A3O

(Col Gregg D. Vanderley)

Pages: 57

This instruction implements AFPD 10-9, Lead Command Designation and Responsibilities for

Weapon Systems and AFPD 11-5, Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (SUAS) Rules, Procedures, and Service. It establishes the Standardization/Evaluation (Stan/Eval) Program for SUAS operations by Air Force military and civilian personnel, personnel of other services and foreign personnel assigned or attached to USAF units, and contracted Small Unmanned Aircraft

Systems-Operators (SUAS-Os) as stipulated in contracts. This publication applies to the Air

Force Reserve Command (AFRC) and the Air National Guard (ANG). This AFI may be supplemented at any level, but all supplements must be routed to HAF/A3O-AS for coordination prior to certification and approval. 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

MAJCOM IAW AFI 11-215, USAF Flight Manuals Program (FMP). Ensure that all records created as a result of processes prescribed in this publication are maintained in accordance with

AFMAN 33-363, Management of Records, and disposed of in accordance with the Air Force

Records Disposition Schedule (RDS) located at https://www.my.af.mil/afrims/afrims/afrims/rims.cfm.

Chapter 1—PURPOSE 4

1.1. SUAS-O Standardization/Evaluation Program

1.2. Objectives

1.3. Waiver Authority

http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/ https://www.my.af.mil/afrims/afrims/afrims/rims.cfm

2 AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012

1.4. Key Definitions:

Chapter 2—HIGHER HEADQUARTERS SUAS STAN/EVAL FUNCTIONS AND

ORGANIZATION 5

2.1. Responsibilities:

2.2. Major Commands

2.3. Numbered Air Forces

2.4. Stan/Eval Visits

Chapter 3—UNIT SUAS STAN/EVAL FUNCTIONS AND ORGANIZATION 8

3.1. Scope

3.2. Group

3.3. Squadron/Detachment/Unit

Chapter 4—SUAS EVALUATORS 11

4.1. General

4.2. Selection

4.3. Functions

Chapter 5—SUAS EVALUATIONS 13

5.1. General

5.2. Qualification Evaluations

5.3. Emergency Procedures Evaluations (EPE)

5.4. Supplementary Evaluations

5.5. SUAS-E Evaluation Requirements

Chapter 6—SUAS-O EXAMINATION PROGRAM 25

6.1. Purpose

6.2. Scope

6.3. Administrative Procedures

6.4. Requisite Examinations

6.5. Unit Periodic Examinations (optional)

Chapter 7—DOCUMENTATION 28

7.1. Scope

7.2. Qualifications and Certifications

7.3. Commander-Directed Downgrade

7.4. Decertification

AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012 3

7.5. AF Form 8, Certificate of Aircrew Qualification

7.6. Commander-Directed Downgrade

Table 7.1. Commander-Directed Downgrade (non-flying-related cases)

Table 7.2. Commander-Directed Downgrade (flying-related cases, intermediate level of restriction)

7.7. AF Form 4348, USAF Aircrew Certifications

7.8. AF Form 942, Record of Evaluation

Chapter 8—ADDITIONAL PROGRAMS 41

8.1. Flight Crew Information File

Table 8.1. Required Volumes

Table 8.2. Volume II Mandatory Publications

8.2. Flight-Related Commander’s Interest Item (CIICheck w/IG)

8.3. Go/No-Go Procedures

8.4. Electronic Data Storage

8.5. Instructor Certified Events

8.6. Stan/Eval Board (SEB)

8.7. Trend Analysis Program

Attachment 1—GLOSSARY OF REFERENCES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION 45

Attachment 2—AF FORM 8 51

Attachment 3—AF FORM 942 53

Attachment 4—STAN/EVAL BOARD (SEB) MINUTES FORMAT (EXAMPLE) 54

Attachment 5—DOD UAS CATEGORIES 56

Attachment 6—FLIGHT CREW INFORMATION FILE TEMPLATE 57

4 AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012

Chapter 1

PURPOSE

1.1. SUAS-O Standardization/Evaluation Program. The SUAS-O

Standardization/Evaluation (Stan/Eval) Program is designed to ensure a high degree of effectiveness in accomplishing the mission of the SUAS force. This will be achieved by command supervision, employment of standard SUAS-O tasks, use of standard publications, and maintenance of a disciplined SUAS-O force by administration of frequent tests and flight evaluations. The purpose of the SUAS-O Stan/Eval Program is to provide commanders a tool to validate mission readiness and evaluate the effectiveness of individual SUAS-Os to include qualifications and capabilities. AFI 11-502 volumes 1, 2, and 3 draw from the respective AFI 11-

202volumes 1, 2, and 3, with modifications tailored to Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems;

knowledge of the AFI 11-202 series is highly encouraged in order to fully understand the parallels and differences between systems and their supporting instructions.

1.2. Objectives. Specific program objectives are to:

1.2.1. Provide a system to assess and document individual SUAS-O proficiency and the capability to accomplish assigned tasks.

1.2.2. Develop and ensure standardization of operational procedures for SUAS employment.

1.2.3. Ensure compliance with appropriate operational, training, and administrative directives.

1.2.4. Evaluate and revise operational directives, procedures, and techniques as required.

1.2.5. Recognize trends and recommend/initiate changes to training programs and directives.

1.3. Waiver Authority. Unless otherwise specified, HAF/A3O-AS is the waiver authority for this instruction. Waivers to the basic guidance in this instruction will be requested through

Stan/Eval channels to MAJCOM/A3 or equivalent level IAW AFI 11-215. MAJCOM/A3s will forward request in message or memo format to HAF/A3O-AS, with a copy to HQ

AFSOC/A3OU. Waivers to supplemental guidance will be approved by the MAJCOM agency that generated the supplement. Unless otherwise specified, waivers to this Instruction will be valid for a period of 12 months from approval date. Units assigned, attached, or under operational control of a geographic combatant command will request waivers through the

Commander Air Force Forces (COMAFFOR) who may approve, disapprove, or forward to

HAF/A3O-AS for resolution, with a copy to HQ AFSOC/A3OU (Exception: Air Force Material command (AFMC) is not required to send a copy to HQ AFSOC/A3OU). Waiver authority for supplemental guidance will be as specified in the supplement.

1.4. Key Definitions:

1.4.1. ―Will‖ and ―Shall‖ indicate a mandatory requirement.

1.4.2. ―Should‖ indicates a recommended procedure that is required, if practical.

1.4.3. ―May‖ indicates an acceptable or suggested means of accomplishment.

1.4.4. See Attachment 1, Glossary of References and Supporting Information for additional terms.

AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012 5

Chapter 2

HIGHER HEADQUARTERS SUAS STAN/EVAL FUNCTIONS AND ORGANIZATION

2.1. Responsibilities:

2.1.1. HAF/A3.

2.1.1.1. Set policy and guide the conduct and execution of the SUAS Stan/Eval program.

2.1.1.2. Delegate office of primary responsibility (OPR) for this instruction to

HAF/A3O-AS.

2.1.1.3. Delegate office of collateral responsibility (OCR) for this instruction to HQ

AFSOC/A3.

2.1.2. HAF/A3O-AS.

2.1.2.1. Review and maintains this instruction.

2.1.2.2. Maintain liaison with Air Staff organizations, MAJCOMs, and appropriate career field managers to ensure compliance by all SUAS personnel.

2.1.2.3. Coordinate with Air Staff organizations and MAJCOM Stan/Eval functions to ensure guidance in separate AFIs conforms to and complies with basic Air Force policy guidance contained in this instruction.

2.2. Major Commands.

2.2.1. General.

2.2.1.1. MAJCOM/A3s are responsible for setting policy and establishing administrative processes. Lower echelons of command are primarily responsible for the flying and evaluation functions.

2.2.1.2. MAJCOM/Stan/Eval ensures MAJCOM policies, guidance and supplements are adequate and comply with the guidance and intent of this Instruction. In the absence of a

Numbered Air Force (NAF) SUAS Stan/Eval function, assume responsibilities listed in paragraph 2.3.2.

2.2.1.3. MAJCOM staffs may fly SUAS to maintain currency and qualification.

MAJCOM staffs are subject to the same requirements of AFI 11-502 Vol 1 for SUAS-O qualifications and certification.

2.2.1.4. AETC maintains administrative oversight of USAF Academy 306th Flying

Training Group UAS Stan/Eval program.

2.2.2. Lead Command (AFSOC) Responsibilities.

2.2.2.1. In coordination with using commands, develop and manage the UAS Group-

Specific, Volume 2, SUAS Operator Evaluation Criteria. The UAS Group-Specific, Volume 2 will not be less restrictive than this AFI. Exception: AFMC will publish evaluation criteria for flight test operations in AFI 11-5FT Vol 2.

6 AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012

2.2.2.2. Review, update and distribute UAS Group-Specific Master Question Files

(MQFs) to using commands. Using commands will coordinate on submissions to correct deficiencies and update questions in the UAS Group-Specific MQFs using AF Form 847.

2.2.2.3. Convene conferences and working groups, as necessary, to review and improve command SUAS Stan/Eval policies and procedures.

2.2.2.4. Monitor and review MAJCOM supplements to this AFI to ensure MAJCOMs comply with basic policy guidance in this instruction.

2.2.3. Using Command Responsibilities.

2.2.3.1. Supplement this Instruction, as required. Additional forms will comply with AFI

33-360, Publications and Forms Management.

2.2.3.1.1. AFRC and ANG will provide information to be included as part of the gaining active duty MAJCOM supplement to this Instruction.

2.2.3.2. Provide staff coordination and control of all Flight Crew Information File (FCIF) items issued from the MAJCOM.

2.2.3.3. Coordinate and process all AF Forms 847 IAW AFI 11-215.

2.2.3.4. Coordinate on operational procedures, evaluation criteria and guidance in conjunction with AFSOC and other user commands operating like systems.

2.2.3.5. Ensure flight publications, operator manuals, and technical orders are updated and maintained.

2.2.3.6. Coordinate with safety offices and agencies to assist in evaluation of SUAS mishaps, as requested, and to determine appropriate corrective actions.

2.2.3.7. In the absence of a Numbered Air Force (NAF) Stan/Eval function, assume responsibilities listed in paragraph 2.3.

2.2.3.8. Observe/augment NAF Stan/Eval visits when feasible.

2.2.3.9. When feasible, observe execution of unit missions and provide feedback.

2.2.4. Augmentation. MAJCOMs may use augmentees from other MAJCOMs to support or conduct cross-command Stan/Eval program reviews. When mutually agreed, SUAS-O flight evaluations may also be conducted. Evaluation criteria will be IAW the appropriate Group-

Specific AFI as supplemented by the supported MAJCOM.

2.3. Numbered Air Forces.

2.3.1. Functions. The NAF Stan/Eval function will:

2.3.1.1. Maintain oversight of evaluation functions in lower echelon units, in gained units, and in AFRC/ANG units for which oversight responsibility is assigned.

2.3.1.2. Conduct Stan/Eval visits IAW MAJCOM supplements/directives.

2.3.1.2.1. Coordinate and process AF Forms 847 IAW AFI 11-215.

2.3.1.3. Provide staff coordination and control of all Flight Crew Information File (FCIF) items issued from the NAF IAW paragraph 8.1.

AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012 7

2.3.1.4. Provide qualified Small UAS Evaluators (SUAS-E) to augment other MAJCOM and NAF agencies when requested IAW paragraph 2.3.3.

2.3.1.5. Administer periodic flight evaluations, when practical, to SUAS-Es in lower echelon units, in gained units, and in AFRC/ANG units for which oversight responsibility is assigned.

2.3.1.6. Observe execution of unit missions and provide feedback when feasible.

2.3.1.7. Review and coordinate on subordinate unit supplements to operational procedures, flying guidance and this Instruction.

2.3.1.8. Review subordinate unit Stan/Eval Board (SEB) minutes and, at a minimum, address any action items requiring Higher Headquarters (HHQ) assistance.

2.3.1.9. Assist MAJCOMs in the creation, review, updating and distribution of required

MQFs. NAFs will coordinate on unit submissions to correct deficiencies to MQFs.

Utilize AF Form 847.

2.3.2. Augmentation. Each NAF may use qualified augmentees from other NAFs to support or conduct Stan/Eval evaluations and inspections with concurrence of all the NAF

Stan/Eval organizations involved.

2.4. Stan/Eval Visits. HHQ Stan/Eval staffs will visit units during the administration of the appropriate Aircrew Standardization/Evaluation Visit (ASEV) schedule, Staff Assistance Visits

(SAVs), or in an informal capacity, as specified in MAJCOM supplements.

8 AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012

Chapter 3

UNIT SUAS STAN/EVAL FUNCTIONS AND ORGANIZATION

3.1. Scope. Units employing SUAS and parent group headquarters are required to establish a

Stan/Eval function. Where there is no parent group headquarters, squadrons or detachments will assume the duties listed for groups.

3.2. Group. The conduct of the unit-level Stan/Eval program is directed by the group commander.

3.2.1. Group Commander Responsibilities.

3.2.1.1. Establish and provide manpower to staff a Stan/Eval function.

3.2.1.2. Ensure materials provided for mission planning are accurate and current.

3.2.1.3. Provide a suitable Stan/Eval testing area.

3.2.1.4. Direct evaluations to maintain a quality SUAS-O force.

3.2.1.5. Direct supplementary evaluations.

3.2.1.6. Chair and determine the composition of a Stan/Eval Board (SEB).

3.2.1.7. Designate Chief of Stan/Eval.

3.2.1.8. Designate Primary SUAS-E.

3.2.2. Group Stan/Eval Organization. Group Stan/Eval staff will consist of the Chief of

Stan/Eval and at least one SUAS-E. The group commander may designate a Primary

SUAS-E to perform the duties of Chief of Stan/Eval. A single SUAS-E may be responsible for all types of Group 1 UAS. Due to system complexity and number of crew positions, each type of Groups 2 and 3 UAS should have a dedicated SUAS-E. See Attachment 5 for definitions of UAS Groups.

3.2.2.1. When necessary to meet unique unit requirements, group commanders may designate additional SUAS-Es or designate SUAS-Es who are not assigned to the group headquarters. Notify the MAJCOM by recording such designation in the SEB minutes

IAW Attachment 4.

3.2.2.2. The group commander may designate Standardization/Evaluation Liaison

Officers (SELOs) to assist group evaluators in administrative Stan/Eval duties.

3.2.2.3. At the discretion of the group commander, group and subordinate unit Stan/Eval programs may be combined.

3.2.2.4. Primary SUAS-E. The primary SUAS-E will be a qualified evaluator in a unit

SUAS. Primary SUAS-E manages the unit SUAS Standardization and Evaluation program. This may be an additional duty providing the Stan/Eval responsibilities are not compromised. Exception: For units undergoing SUAS conversion, the primary SUAS-E may be qualified in the SUAS to which the unit is converting, even if none are yet assigned.

AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012 9

3.2.2.5. Establish procedures for review and quality control of SUAS-O flight evaluation grading criteria IAW AFI 11-5GP(1,2, or 3)-SUAS Volume 2. Exception: AFMC: see

AFI 11-5FT Vol 2 for AFMC evaluation criteria for test operations.

3.2.2.6. SUAS training folders (STF) will be used for Group 1 SUAS and flight evaluation folders (FEF) for Groups 2 & 3 SUAS. Establish procedures to maintain and review unit STF/FEF. Document these procedures in the unit supplement to this instruction. Maintain unit STF/FEFs, if applicable. For the purposes of this instruction, STF/FEF refers to the training documentation in SUASMAN. Individual units may maintain physical copies of STFs/FEFs at their discretion.

3.2.2.7. Establish procedures for the SUAS-O Examination Program according to

Chapter 6 of this Instruction. Document SUAS-O Examination Program in the unit supplement to this Instruction.

3.2.2.8. Establish and maintain a trend analysis program.

3.2.2.8.1. Scope will include trend analysis of all evaluations.

3.2.2.8.2. For units with more than one type of unmanned aircraft, combine discrepancies common to all SUAS or SUAS-Os to determine trends (e.g., loss-of-link procedures).

3.2.2.8.3. For Formal Training Units (FTUs), maintain separate trend data for students and qualified/instructor crews.

3.2.2.8.4. When trends are noted, recommend corrective action and assign an

OPR/Office of Collateral Responsibility (OCR); report trends and status to the commander during the SEB until closed. The Group primary SUAS-E will publish and define the trend analysis program in the unit supplement to this Instruction and maintain trend data for at least one year

3.2.2.9. Conduct Supplementary Evaluations as directed.

3.2.2.10. Conduct a SEB and publish minutes IAW the minimum outline of this

Instruction, Attachment 4, and guidance in the MAJCOM supplement to this Instruction.

3.2.2.11. Establish, monitor, and maintain quality control of the unit FCIF program.

3.2.2.12. Establish procedures to manage the flight publications program.

3.2.2.13. Process AF Forms 847 IAW AFI 11-215. Forward endorsements for all approved AF Forms 847 to parent NAF Stan/Eval function or parent MAJCOM

Stan/Eval function if a NAF Stan/Eval does not exist.

3.2.2.14. Publish a unit supplement of procedures for the implementation of this

Instruction.

3.3. Squadron/Detachment/Unit. The commander is directly responsible to the group commander for the conduct of the Stan/Eval program.

3.3.1. Commander Responsibilities:

3.3.1.1. Direct evaluations as required to maintain a quality SUAS-O force.

10 AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012

3.3.1.2. Direct supplementary evaluations as needed (request assistance from group

Stan/Eval if necessary).

3.3.1.3. Designate unit Primary SUAS-E. This may be an additional duty providing

SUAS-E duties are not compromised.

3.3.1.4. Annotate all attached HHQ and attached unit flight evaluators in the unit letter ofcertification and record attachment in SEB minutes IAW Attachment 4.

3.3.1.5. Attend as many evaluation debriefings as practical.

3.3.1.6. May designate Standardization/Evaluation Liaison Officers (SELOs) to assist in administrative Stan/Eval duties.

3.3.2. Primary SUAS-E Responsibilities. The unit Primary SUAS-E manages the

Stan/Eval program and will:

3.3.2.1. Manage and conduct flight evaluations and emergency procedures evaluations

(EPE) as required.

3.3.2.2. Implement the SUAS-O Examination Program in conjunction with evaluations as outlined in the unit supplement to this Instruction.

3.3.2.3. Implement the group Stan/Eval STF/FEF maintenance (reference SUASMAN) and review program directed by the unit supplement to this Instruction. Exception:

AFMC is not required to use SUASMAN for flight test operations only.

3.3.2.4. Assist the group Primary SUAS-E in managing the Stan/Eval trends program.

3.3.2.5. Recommend changes to applicable publications using AF Form 847 IAW AFI

11-215.

3.3.2.6. Implement the flight publications program and ensuring compliance with the unit FCIF program.

3.3.2.7. Ensure proper completion, routing, and filing of MAJCOM-approved evaluation forms.

3.3.3. Squadron/Detachment Stan/Eval Organization.

3.3.3.1. The primary SUAS-E will be qualified in a unit SUAS. This requirement can be waived with group commander approval and notification to the MAJCOM. Record waiver in SEB minutes IAW Attachment 4.

3.3.3.2. Squadron Stan/Eval manning will be as directed by the MAJCOM supplement to this Instruction.

3.3.3.3. Squadron SUAS-E should be assigned to the squadron. With group commander approval, the unit may designate SUAS-Es who are not assigned to the squadron when necessary to meet unique unit requirements. Notify the MAJCOM by recording such designation in the SEB minutes IAW Attachment 4.

AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012 11

Chapter 4

SUAS EVALUATORS

4.1. General. The evaluation portion of the SUAS Stan/Eval Program is administered by

SUAS-Es at MAJCOM and unit levels. SUAS-Es will use the evaluation criteria established in

AFI 11-5GP(1, 2, or 3)-SUAS volume 2 to conduct Qualification and EPEs SUAS-Es must be certified and appointed in writing by the commander.. Exception: For flight test operations, AFMC will establish training and certification criteria IAW AFI 11-5FT Vol 2.

4.2. Selection.

4.2.1. SUAS-Evaluator. Unit commanders will select and designate evaluators from the most highly qualified and experienced SUAS-Is with recommendations from the primary

SUAS-E.

4.2.1.1. Must be at least a commissioned officer, 5-level NCO, civilian equivalent or contractor in his/her Duty AFSC and an experienced SUAS-I.

4.2.2. Primary SUAS-Evaluator. Unit commanders will appoint the primary SUAS-E from the most highly qualified and experienced evaluators. The primary SUAS-E will manage every aspect of the unit’s SUAS evaluation and trend analysis program.

4.2.2.1. Must meet trainer and certifier status IAW AFI 36-2201, Air Force Training

Program

4.3. Functions. SUAS-Es:

4.3.1. Conduct flight and emergency procedure evaluations as required.

4.3.2. Maintain qualification as instructors.

4.3.3. Maintain MR status as defined in AFI 11-5 Group-Specific, Volume 1. Exceptions:

SUAS-Es assigned to MAJCOM headquarters, DRU organizations (USAFA cadets) and

MAJCOM-designated units must maintain at least Basic Aircraft Qualified (BAQ) status.

4.3.4. Administer evaluations only within their specialty system and only evaluate those missions in which they maintain qualification. Exception: SPOT evaluations and where specifically authorized in UAS Group-Specific, Volume 2. MAJCOMs may establish procedures for SUAS-Es to administer evaluations outside of NAF/unit.

4.3.5. Conduct a thorough pre-mission briefing for the examinee and applicable crew members on all aspects of the evaluation. Explain the purpose of the evaluation and how it will be conducted. The examinee will accomplish all mission planning.

4.3.6. Conduct a thorough post-mission debriefing for the examinee and applicable operators on all aspects of the evaluation. Thoroughly critique all aspects of the flight. During the critique, the SUAS-E will review the evaluatee’s overall rating, specific deviations, area grades assigned (if other than qualified), and any required additional training. Evaluator judgment will be the determining factor in arriving at the overall grade.

4.3.7. Immediately correct breaches of flying safety or flight discipline during an evaluation.

If this situation occurs, the SUAS-E will also debrief unit supervision, as designated in the unit supplement, and document the deviation on the AF Form 8 IAW Attachment 2.

12 AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012

4.3.8. Immediately notify the examinee’s squadron commander/operations officer and flight commander whenever Qualification Level 2 or 3 (―Q-2‖ or ―Q-3‖) performance is observed.

4.3.9. Will not administer evaluations outside of their MAJCOM unless specifically requested by the MAJCOM Stan/Eval organization of the examinee and approved by the

MAJCOM Stan/Eval organization of the examiner.

4.3.10. In order to ensure the most comprehensive evaluation, SUAS-E will not perform primary SUAS-O duties during evaluations. Exceptions: Evaluatee failure during the qualification phase, evaluatee completion of the qualification phase, or SUAS-E currency requirements.

AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012 13

Chapter 5

SUAS EVALUATIONS

5.1. General. The SUAS Stan/Eval Program utilizes three types of evaluations to ensure qualification of SUAS-Os and standardization of operations: qualification, emergency procedures, and supplementary. SUAS-O qualification evaluations are administered periodically and documented on AF Form 8, Certification of Aircrew Qualification to ensure qualification.

EPEs are requisites for qualification evaluations. Supplementary evaluations are unstructured tools to be used by the commander to ensure standardization of flying and other operations.

5.2. Qualification Evaluations. Qualification evaluations consist of two structured phases, ground and flight. Each phase requires the completion of requisite tasks. The ground phase, when required, includes a series of written examinations and evaluation of performance in a controlled emergency procedures environment. The flight phase includes flight operations or, if applicable, simulator evaluation of performance.

5.2.1. Qualification Evaluation Categories. Periodic crew qualification (QUAL) are administered to ensure basic qualification in the UA and crew position of a SUAS-O.

Evaluations are accomplished to ensure crew are certified and maintain instructor qualification (INSTR). Evaluation and certification of specific crew performance may also be accomplished (SPOT). Crew will complete the following types of certification evaluations as appropriate:

5.2.1.1. QUAL Evaluations. All operators will complete a periodic QUAL evaluation in their primary assigned SUAS per the standards, to include requisites, as specified in the applicable UAS Group-Specific, Volume 2. The AF Form 8, Attachment 2, will indicate the applicable SUAS position, type(s), and category(ies). Positions are SUAS-O, Mission

Operator (MO), Mission Commander (MC), Internal Operator (IO), External Operator

(EO), Instructor, and Evaluator. QUAL evaluations after initial qualification will include qualification to employ the SUAS in accomplishing the unit’s operational mission

(QUAL/MSN). Exception: AFMC – See AFI 11-5FT Vol 2 for AFMC evaluation criteria.

5.2.1.2. MSN Evaluations. All SUAS-Os maintaining BAQ or MR status will complete a periodic MSN evaluation that includes evaluation in their primary assigned SUAS, to include requisites, as specified in the applicable UAS Group-Specific, Volume 2. The

MSN portion should reflect the type and difficulty of tasks required in the performance of normal operational and training sorties. The requirement for a MSN portion may be waived for those SUAS where performance of normal operational, test and training sorties involves tasks covered during the accomplishment of a basic QUAL evaluation as specified in UAS Group-Specific, Volume 2.

5.2.1.3. Instructor (INSTR) Evaluations. SUAS-Os maintaining instructor qualification in a particular SUAS must complete initial and periodic evaluations of instructional capability in that SUAS. Instructors are evaluated to the standards contained in UAS

Group-Specific Volume 2. Specialized, universal, or multiple qualification operators maintaining instructor qualification in multiple similar SUAS will accomplish initial and periodic evaluations as specified in MAJCOM Supplements and/ Group-Specific, 14 AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012

Volume 2. Exception: AFMC – See AFI 11-5FT Vol 2 for AFMC evaluation criteria for test operations.

5.2.1.3.1. To initially qualify as an instructor in a particular SUAS, the member must successfully complete an initial instructor (INIT INSTR) evaluation. Candidate

SUAS-I must be qualified in all sub-areas they will instruct and are expected to meet the standards outlined in UAS Group-Specific Volume 2. Instructor candidates will be evaluated on instructor performance during a representative sample of maneuvers.

Instructors should have a solid understanding of systems, procedures, and techniques.

Accomplish INIT INSTR evaluations on actual instructional missions whenever possible. When students are not available or mission requirements/crew composition requirements prevent inclusion of students, another crewmember or, as a last resort, the evaluator may serve as the student for the purpose of evaluating the examinee’s instructional ability. Exception: AFMC – See AFI 11-5FT Vol 2 for AFMC evaluation criteria.

5.2.1.3.2. Periodic evaluation of the ability of SUAS crew members to instruct will be conducted during all subsequent periodic evaluations. The AF Form 8

Mission/Check description for these periodic evaluations will not include INSTR as the AF Form 8 aircraft/crew position is already annotated with highest qualification demonstrated during the previous evaluation.

5.2.1.3.3. If instructor qualification is lost in a SUAS it may be regained through an instructor requalification evaluation IAW paragraph 5.2.2.2.6 or as directed in the

UAS Group-Specific, Volume 1.

5.2.1.3.4. QUAL, MSN and INSTRUCTOR evaluations can be combined whenever possible.

5.2.1.4. SPOT Evaluations –Flight or Ground (Optional). A SPOT evaluation is an administrative tool used by a commander to identify and evaluate implemented solutions to operational problems, and is not intended to satisfy the requirements of a periodic evaluation (e.g., QUAL/MSN or INSTR). SPOT evaluations have no specific requisites or requirements, unless specified in MAJCOM supplements. An evaluation that begins as a SPOT evaluation may become (and be documented as) a required periodic evaluation if all required flight phase requirements are completed during the SPOT evaluation and the examinee subsequently completes all ground phase requirements for the evaluation within the periods described in paragraph 5.2.6. Do not add on missions (flights) to complete the requirements for a periodic evaluation unless the group/squadron commander concurs with the SUAS-O’s desire to realign the evaluation expiration date and approves the additional flight time requirements. Evaluations not listed in paragraphs

5.2.1.1 and 5.2.1.2 will be documented as SPOT evaluations. Note: When the SUAS-E administering a SPOT evaluation is not qualified in the same SUAS and same crew position of the examinee, the evaluation will not be credited towards a periodic evaluation.

5.2.2. Qualification Evaluation Prefixes. The following prefixes will be used, when applicable, to further describe the evaluations listed in paragraphs 5.2.1.1 - 5.2.1.3.

AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012 15

5.2.2.1. Initial (INIT). The first evaluation of any type for a crew position or instructor qualification in an SUAS type (e.g., INIT QUAL, INIT INSTR).

5.2.2.2. Requalification (RQ). An evaluation administered to remedy a loss of qualification due to expiration of a required periodic evaluation, loss of currency, a flight recheck following a failed periodic evaluation, or loss of qualification due to a commander-directed downgrade.

5.2.2.2.1. When loss of qualification is for expiration of a required periodic evaluation, the evaluation given will be IAW the guidance for that periodic evaluation. The AF Form 8 description will be documented with an RQ prefix. Note:

The AF Form 8 description will not be documented with an RQ prefix when expiration of a required periodic evaluation results in loss of qualification due to the individual’s failure to complete one or more of the ground phase requisites (paragraph

5.2.3.). However, if the flight evaluation has been successfully completed within the eligibility period (paragraph 5.2.6.1.), or out-of-the-eligibility period (paragraph

5.2.6.2.), the Group/CC may determine qualification will be re-established by completion of the ground requisites without re-accomplishment of the flight evaluation or completed ground requisites (paragraph 5.2.15.).

5.2.2.2.2. When loss of qualification is due to loss of currency, the evaluation profile will be as directed by the squadron commander and will include, as a minimum, those items for which the individual is non-current. The AF Form 8 description will be documented with RQ SPOT.

5.2.2.2.3. When loss of qualification is for failure to pass a flight evaluation, the recheck evaluation will be IAW the provisions of paragraph 5.2.12. The flight evaluation form description will be documented with an RQ prefix or RQ SPOT, as applicable.

5.2.2.2.4. When loss of qualification is due to a commander-directed downgrade (see paragraph 7.3.), the evaluation profile will be as directed by the commander. The AF

Form 8 description will be documented with an RQ prefix or RQ SPOT, as applicable.

5.2.2.2.5. Do not use RQ to prefix a recheck following a failed INIT evaluation. No qualification was achieved, thus requalification is not possible.

5.2.2.2.6. When requalification deals with instructor capability, the flight evaluation form description will be documented with RQ INSTR (not RQ SPOT).

5.2.2.3. No-Notice (N/N). A no-notice evaluation is one where the examinee is notified of the evaluation at or after the beginning of normal preparation for the mission. The beginning of normal preparation for a mission will be determined by the SUAS-E, no more than 24 hours prior, and may be further defined in supplements to this Instruction and as specified in UAS Group-Specific, Volume 2. The intent is to preclude extraordinary preparation for the mission.

5.2.2.3.1. The no-notice evaluation program provides commanders a sampling of daily SUAS-O performance and an assessment of unit training effectiveness.

16 AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012

5.2.2.3.2. An examinee may utilize a no-notice evaluation to update a QUAL/MSN evaluation expiration date provided all requirements for the evaluation are completed within the periods described in paragraph 5.2.6. If all requirements were not completed on the first flight, subsequent flights are authorized to complete required events. If the examinee elects not to update a QUAL/MSN evaluation expiration date, the evaluation will be documented as a SPOT evaluation.

5.2.2.4. Simulator (SIM). An evaluation where the flight phase requisite is conducted in a simulator as specified in UAS Group-Specific, Volume 2. A SIM evaluation must include system set-up and tear down up to launch.

5.2.2.5. Multiple Prefixes. More than one prefix may be used to describe an evaluation

(e.g., N/N SIM SPOT). The applicability of any prefixes to portions of any combined evaluations and the purpose for any prefixes will be explained under description on the

AF Form 8.

5.2.3. Ground Phase Requisites. The ground phase for periodic SUAS-O evaluations includes requisites listed below. See Chapter 6 of this Instruction for additional guidance on

SUAS-O examinations.

5.2.3.1. QUAL Evaluations. Written examination, Boldface/Critical Action Procedures

(CAPs) examination / EPE (if applicable), and as specified in UAS Group-Specific, Volume 2. Scheduled periodic evaluations will be accomplished only after written examinations are completed.

5.2.4. Flight Phase Requisites. The flight phase for evaluations include execution in the

SUAS type or a suitable simulator profile that will allow evaluation of SUAS-O performance. Flight evaluations conducted on a simulator require a waiver from the Using

MAJCOM. The profile used to fulfill the flight phase requisite must incorporate all appropriate requirements set in the applicable UAS Group-Specific, Volume 2, and allow accurate measure of the proficiency of the examinee. Evaluation profiles will reflect unit tasking, daily training missions, be realistic, and incorporate current tactics applicable to the unit mission. Profile will typically include mission planning, execution, and debrief. If the assigned system is a multi-person operation, then the SUAS-O must perform the mission in all qualified positions, AFSOC/A3T determines the approval criteria for simulators and other

SUAS crew training devices.

5.2.5. Timing of SUAS-O Qualification Evaluations.

5.2.5.1. Expiration Date. Required periodic evaluations expire on the last day of the month in the timeframe specified by the AFI 11-5GP(1,2, or 3)-SUAS, Volume 2.

5.2.5.2. Scheduling. Schedule periodic evaluations within the eligibility period (six-month period prior to expiration date).

5.2.5.3. Extended Evaluations. Periodic evaluations may be extended on a case-by case basis according to the following criteria:

5.2.5.3.1. Commanders may extend the expiration date of periodic evaluations up to three months for the reasons listed below.

5.2.5.3.1.1. Individuals departing Permanent Change of Station / Permanent

Change of Assignment (PCS/PCA) to a non-SUAS-O assignment.

AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012 17

5.2.5.3.1.2. Individuals departing PCS or Temporary Duty (TDY) for retraining in another SUAS type.

5.2.5.3.1.3. Individuals undergoing unit SUAS conversion.

5.2.5.3.1.4. Individual removal from SUAS-O status (e.g. separation or retirement from the Service).

5.2.5.3.1.5. Individuals participating in contingency operations (to include operations other than war, alert, etc.) who are not able to complete the required flight evaluation(s) before or during deployment. This will be on a case-by-case basis and is not authority to grant blanket extensions for scheduled operational deployments.

5.2.5.4. Documentation. Document extensions with a Memorandum for Record (MFR) placed in the SUAS Training Folder / Flight Evaluation Folder (STF/FEF) specifying extension authority, the new expiration date, and include a brief description of the extension.

5.2.5.4.1. Extension MFRs will be dated prior to the expiration date of any affected periodic evaluation.

5.2.5.4.2. File the MFR on top of the affected AF Form 8 in the STF/FEF.

5.2.5.4.3. Requisites not completed during original eligibility period must be completed prior to extended expiration date indicated on the MFR.

5.2.5.4.4. Incorporate the information contained in the MFR onto the affected AF

Form 8 under Remarks when action is complete and remove the MFR from the

STF/FEF. Memos for record become a permanent part of the STF/FEF only when the Major discrepancy addressed by the MFR is not addressed or corrected by a later AF Form 8. Example: If an evaluation was extended based on an AFSOC waiver, an MFR will remain in the STF/FEF until such time as the next evaluation is completed. That waiver reference is commented on in Remarks of the AF Form

8.

5.2.5.5. Requirements Before Permanent Change of Station/Temporary Duty. If a periodic evaluation will expire within three months after the proposed departure for a

PCS or during an upcoming TDY complete the required evaluation(s) before departing for either the PCS or the TDY. Obtain a MAJCOM Stan/Eval waiver for unusual situations.

5.2.6. Requisite Completion. One set of requisites may be used to satisfy the requirements of combined evaluations as defined in UAS Group-Specific, Volume 2. Requisites from a completed evaluation may be used for subsequent evaluations provided they cover all required areas and are within the requisite zone for each evaluation. Also see paragraph 5.3.1

For all evaluations, accomplish requisites as follows:

5.2.6.1. In-the-Eligibility Period. For scheduled or no-notice periodic evaluations in the eligibility period, all requisites must be completed within the six-month eligibility period prior to the expiration date of the current evaluation period to update that expiration date.

18 AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012

5.2.6.2. Out-of-the-Eligibility Period. For periodic evaluations outside the eligibility period, all requisites must be completed within a six-month period encompassing the month in which the flight evaluation was administered. Exception: For extended evaluations, requisites may be completed between the beginning of the six-month eligibility period prior to the original expiration date and the extended expiration date.

5.2.6.3. Recheck. For evaluations used to remedy a failed evaluation:

5.2.6.3.1. Requisites valid for a failed evaluation per paragraph 5.2.6.1 or 5.2.6.2 remain valid, IAW paragraph 5.2.12.1.

5.2.6.3.2. Requisite completion dates from the Q-3 AF Form 8 will not be annotated on the recheck AF Form 8. The recheck AF Form 8 will only include documentation of the flight phase evaluation.

5.2.7. Alternate Means of Evaluation. When flight evaluation of a required area is not possible, the area may be evaluated in a simulator or verbally. SUAS-Es will make every effort to evaluate all required areas during flight operations before resorting to this option.

See the appropriate UAS Group-Specific, Volume 2 for areas prohibited from simulator/verbal evaluation.

5.2.8. Evaluation Criteria Source. AFSOC/A3, in coordination with using commands, will establish and maintain standardized INSTR, and QUAL/MSN evaluation criteria in the appropriate UAS Group-Specific, Volume 2.

5.2.9. Grading System. A two-tiered grading system is used to evaluate and document

SUAS-O performance. On one level, individual scores are recorded for examinations and areas/subareas of SUAS-O performance are individually graded against established evaluation criteria. Performance less than fully qualified is documented. On the second level, an overall qualification level is determined from the compilation of these individual scores/grades.

5.2.9.1. Area/Subarea Grades. UAS Group-Specific, Volume 2 will establish areas and subareas to be evaluated during emergency procedure and other evaluations to include the appropriate grading criteria for those areas/subareas. Areas/subareas will have a two-level

(Q/U) or three-level (Q/Q-/U) grading system. Discrepancies will be documented against the listed subareas.

5.2.9.1.1. Q is the desired level of performance. The examinee demonstrated a satisfactory knowledge of all required information, performed SUAS-O duties within the prescribed tolerances, and accomplished the assigned mission.

5.2.9.1.2. Q- indicates the examinee is qualified to perform the assigned area/subarea tasks, but requires debriefing or additional training as determined by the SUAS-E or there were minor deviations from established standards that did not jeopardize mission accomplishment or flight safety.

5.2.9.1.3. U indicates a breach of flight discipline, performance outside allowable parameters or deviations from prescribed procedures/tolerances that adversely affected mission accomplishment or compromised flight safety. An examinee receiving an area/subarea grade of U normally requires additional training. When, in the judgment of the SUAS-E, additional training will not constructively improve

AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012 19

examinee’s performance, it is not required. In this case, the SUAS-E must thoroughly debrief the examinee.

5.2.9.2. Critical Area. AFSOC/A3 will establish evaluation areas that, upon failure, would adversely affect the qualification of a SUAS-O. Critical areas include, but are not limited to, Airmanship, Flight Discipline, Safety, and all emergency procedures. Grade all critical areas as either Qualified (Q) or Unqualified (U). Additional critical areas will be established in UAS group-specific Volume 2.

5.2.9.3. Qualification Levels. EPEs and overall evaluation performance are graded by qualification levels as follows:

5.2.9.3.1. Qualification Level 1 (Q-1). The SUAS-O demonstrated desired performance and knowledge of procedures, equipment and directives within tolerances specified in the grading criteria. This will be awarded when no discrepancies were noted, and may be awarded when discrepancies are noted if:

5.2.9.3.1.1. The discrepancies resulted in no U grades being given in any area(s)/subarea(s).

5.2.9.3.1.2. In the judgment of the SUAS-E, none of the discrepancies preclude awarding of an overall Qualification Level 1.

5.2.9.3.1.3. All discrepancies noted during the evaluation were cleared during thedebriefing of that evaluation.

5.2.9.3.2. Qualification Level 2 (Q-2). The SUAS-O demonstrated the ability to perform duties safely, but:

5.2.9.3.2.1. There were one or more area(s)/subarea(s) where additional training was assigned.

5.2.9.3.2.2. A non-critical area/subarea grade of U was awarded.

5.2.9.3.2.3. In the judgment of the SUAS-E, there is justification based on performance in one or several areas/subareas.

5.2.9.3.3. Qualification Level 3 (Q-3). The SUAS-O demonstrated an unacceptable level of safety, performance, or knowledge.

5.2.9.3.3.1. An area grade of U awarded in a critical area requires an overall Q-3 for the evaluation. Note: Airmanship, Flight Discipline, and Safety are considered critical areas for all SUAS-Os. Additionally, all emergency procedures are considered critical. If one critical area is graded U, then the overall grade for the evaluation will be Q-3.

5.2.9.3.3.2. An overall Q-3 can be awarded if, in the judgment of the SUAS-E, there is justification based on performance in one or several areas/subareas.

5.2.9.4. Critical Emergency Procedures. Grade Boldface examinations as either

Qualified (Q) or Unqualified (U).

5.2.9.5. Examinations. Grade written, computer-based, or electronic examinations as a percentage of correct answers. See paragraph 6.4.3.1. for minimum passing grade criteria.

20 AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012

5.2.10. Grading Policies.

5.2.10.1. Requisite Examinations. The SUAS-E will consider performance on requisite examinations in assigning the overall qualification level.

5.2.10.2. Performance Areas/Subareas. Use the two-level (Q/U) or three-level (Q/Q-/U) grading system when applying the grading criteria definitions specified in the applicable

UAS Group-Specific, Volume 2 to grade areas/subareas.

5.2.10.2.1. The SUAS-E must grade the areas/subareas listed as ―required‖ in the general and specific evaluation sections of the applicable UAS Group-Specific, Volume 2.

5.2.10.2.2. The SUAS-E will grade any area/subarea observed during an evaluation if performance in that area/subarea impacts the specific evaluation accomplished or flight safety.

5.2.10.2.3. Grading criteria tolerances assume smooth air and stable aircraft conditions.

5.2.10.2.4. Minor momentary deviations from grading criteria tolerances are acceptable, provided the examinee applies prompt corrective action and such deviations do not jeopardize flight safety. Consider cumulative deviations when determining the overall area/subarea grade.

5.2.10.2.5. The SUAS-E may further identify an area/sub-area as ―Commendable‖ if, in the examiner’s determination, the SUAS-O has demonstrated exceptional skill and knowledge in that particular area/sub-area. Document commendable areas in the examiner’s remarks section of the AF Form 8.

5.2.10.3. Overall Qualification Levels.

5.2.10.3.1. The overall qualification level awarded on an evaluation is based on performance during both the flight and ground phases. An overall grade of Q-1 or Q-

2 will be awarded only after all evaluation requirements have been completed and given due consideration. An overall grade of Q-3 may be awarded at any time.

5.2.10.3.2. To receive a qualified grade on an evaluation, the SUAS-O must satisfy the criteria set forth in the applicable UAS Group-Specific, Volume 2 and demonstrate ability to operate the SUAS and/or equipment safely and effectively during all phases of an evaluation.

5.2.10.3.3. Overall qualification grades will be a cumulative process. While UAS roup-Specific, Volume 2 guidance may dictate the highest grade for a flight or EPE based on area and subarea performance, SUAS-E judgment will always be the determining factor in deciding the overall qualification level.

5.2.10.4. Exceptionally Qualified Designation. An exceptionally qualified designation may be awarded by the SUAS-E. The designation can only be applied to the total evaluation - not to separate requisites. The designation may be awarded when:

5.2.10.4.1. The SUAS-O has demonstrated exceptional skill and knowledge in all phases of the evaluation;

AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012 21

5.2.10.4.2. The SUAS-O has not failed any requisite and;

5.2.10.4.3. The SUAS-O received a qualified grade with no remedial action on all areas/subareas evaluated during emergency procedures and flight evaluations.

5.2.11. Remedial Action. All grades of Q- or less require action to remedy the discrepancy and/or deficiency in performance. Remedial action includes debriefing discrepancies and/or assignment of additional training. See paragraph 5.2.12. when discrepancies result in failure to pass a flight evaluation.

5.2.11.1. Debriefed Discrepancy. Remedial action accomplished during debrief of the evaluation wherein the SUAS-E provides briefing/instruction concerning the discrepancy and determines the examinee has gained the necessary knowledge or proficiency to remedy the discrepancy. The discrepancy area/subarea description is annotated with

―Debriefed‖ in the Remarks section of the AF Form 8.

5.2.11.2. Additional Training. Any training recommended by a SUAS-E to remedy deficiencies identified during an evaluation.

5.2.11.2.1. Additional training may include self-study, ground instruction, use of a simulator, or flying. To complete additional training, the examinee must demonstrate attainment of satisfactory knowledge or proficiency.

5.2.11.2.2. Additional training is documented in Item(s) Requiring Additional

Training on the AF Form 8. Description of assigned additional training will include how satisfactory knowledge or proficiency will be demonstrated to an evaluator or instructor.

5.2.11.2.3. Due dates and dates on which additional training is completed will be documented in the appropriate areas of the AF Form 8.

5.2.11.2.4. The evaluator or instructor who completed the additional training will sign and date verifying completion of all assigned training on the flight evaluation form in Item(s) Requiring Additional Training.

5.2.11.2.5. Commanders will ensure required additional training is completed.

Accomplish additional training by the last day of the third month following the date of the discrepancy, e.g., for an evaluation on 21 Jan 06, additional training must be accomplished by 30 Apr 06. If an SUAS-O exceeds the allotted time for completion of additional training, the squadron commander will review the situation and direct appropriate action. Document the circumstances with an MFR placed in the STF/FEF of the affected individual. Incorporate the information contained in the MFR onto the affected AF Form 8 under Remarks when action is complete, and remove the MFR from the STF/FEF. MFRs become a permanent part of the STF/FEF only when the major discrepancy addressed by the MFR is not addressed or corrected by a later AF

Form 8.

5.2.12. Failure to Pass a Flight Evaluation.

5.2.12.1. Recheck. If a SUAS-O fails a flight evaluation, a successful flight or ground recheck must be completed by the end of the third month after the date of the first failure, e.g. for an evaluation on 20 Jun 10, complete the recheck by 30 Sep 10. A recheck is successfully completed when the SUAS-O performs to Q criteria (Q or Q-/debriefed) for

22 AFI11-502V2 26 APRIL 2012

each area graded U. Group/CCs may approve waivers to the time limits in this paragraph on a case-by-case basis.