Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content

What is New?

Policy Update9/16/2019 3:52 PM
News9/16/2019 3:51 PM
News9/16/2019 3:50 PM
155mm Smoke WP M825 Inspection.aspx
Learning Material9/19/2019 3:33 PM
155mm Smoke WP M110A1 Inspection.aspx
Learning Material9/19/2019 3:33 PM
155mm Projectile High Explosives M795 Inspection.aspx
Learning Material9/19/2019 3:33 PM
155mm HERA M549A1 Inspection.aspx
Learning Material9/19/2019 3:32 PM
Port Links Listing 190608A.pdf
Reference9/19/2019 2:41 PM
Ammunition Reference Guide.aspx
Reference9/18/2019 1:19 PM
16 September 2019, Munitions and Explosives Safety Newsletter.pdf
Reference9/16/2019 3:40 PM
155mm Projectile Extended Range Inspection.aspx
Learning Material9/16/2019 9:33 AM
155mm Projectile Illuminating M485 inspection.aspx
Learning Material9/16/2019 9:29 AM
105mm Ctg M1, M314, M395 inspection.aspx
Learning Material9/13/2019 11:07 AM
Picture Placeholder: JOSHUA WUSTNER
09/19/2019 11:31 AM


Prior to 1967 the “front” sector of an Earth-Covered Magazines (ECM) was measured from the center of the headwall. Magazines were constructed based on this assumption.


Now, the front exposure arc originates inside the magazine, intersecting at the Headwall & sidewall (the arc is widened).  Now the canted magazines have a Side to Front exposure by a thin margin.

Corner clips.png

This increases the inter-magazine (IMD) distance required, increases the required K factor, thus requiring drastically reduced storage limits in some cases.




  1. Reduce the limits based on the Front to Side exposure.
  2. Modify criteria (DESR, OP 5, etc.) to allow for a small Front to Side clip to be considered a Side to Side exposure.  How small is small?  Less than 5% of the sidewall sees the front exposure arc?  Modify ESS programming?
  3. Deviations on a case by case basis, using submittal notes in ESS.


What are your thoughts?

9/19/2019 11:31 AMNo
Picture Placeholder: TRAY BLAKLEY
19/18/2019 4:00 PM

Is there a regulation that states aircrafts cannot fly over ammunition?

LANCE MATTHEWS9/19/2019 6:18 AMNo
Picture Placeholder: BRENT DUBOIS
09/18/2019 12:37 PM
The newest version of the Ammunition Reference Guide is now available!

It is now in an online version and easy to keep updated by you the Ammunition Community.
It is a powerful tool and a living knowledge bank where experts are encouraged to contribute their experience and update information as it happens. It allows users to integrate and interlink knowledge into topical-based articles and collaborate on issues up to and including UNCLASSIFIED/FOUO documentation.

Much thanks to QASAS Group 111 who completed the review and conversion of the guide and made this a reality!
Suggestions for edits can be made using the discussion forum on the milBook site - . Old versions of the Reference Guide are also available for historical purpose at that location.
9/18/2019 12:37 PMNo
Picture Placeholder: THEODORE MCHUGH
17/18/2019 4:59 PM

Not an ammunition technical question, but it is the operatiojns realm and some of you may have dealt with this before.  If AMC-R-350-4 calls for a Contracting Officer Representative to attend Ammo-65 (DOD Contractor's Explosives Safety Standards) and DAC farms this couse out to a civilian company, are there channels for AMC to pay the tuition, or refund the tution ($2000.00) to the local command.

It just seems odd to me the AMC would require a GS civilian to have a course not offered by DAC, it is hard enough for Commands to find the funds to support the TDY.   Thanx, Ted

Picture Placeholder: FREDERIC CURRIE
17/16/2019 12:19 PM

​I provide contractor support to AFLCMC. We are in the early stages of a new AF missile acquisition. My question is, How and to whom do we get the drawings to for the purposes of developing the 19-48? Can someone familiarize me with the process. I see the other legacy Air-to-Air missiles listed. Any info would be appreciated.

LAURA FIEFFER7/17/2019 7:58 AMNo
Picture Placeholder: MARK BUSH
06/20/2019 9:58 AM

​Several of my customers have asked about their OIP low marks in Ammo.  I dug this thing up from my 12 years as an Ammo Manager and Master Gunner.  I never failed an inspection with this. Hope this helps someone else out there.Ammo Cradle to Grave Documents._Page_1.jpg

6/20/2019 9:58 AMNo
Picture Placeholder: JANA WHITELAW
25/16/2019 2:41 PM

DA PAM 700-16, para. 12-15a, states DA Form 4949 is used on all ammo, missiles and explosive items along with applicable MFDRs.

​​Is a DA Form 4949 the only form required for expenditure of operational load items?  Or do I also need to complete a DA Form 5692-R when consuming items such as AT-4s and C-4, which are CIIC I, II for operational load purposes?

Additionally, appendix F, para. F-4c, states items in Table F-2 with a "T" will require additional documentation. 

So which forms do I need to complete when expending CIIC I and II items for operational load purposes?

JANA WHITELAW5/20/2019 2:27 PMNo
Picture Placeholder: KITTRELL POWELL
15/4/2019 5:30 PM

​Good afternoon,

Many times in my career I have faced a situation where unit's want to know what I have on hand for CL V. I will typically tell that individual that my asset status report is sensitive in nature and that I am not allowed to give that information out unless it is to give my commander situational awareness of what is available. I am aware that as an Accountable Officer, I am obligated to report my on hand to echelons above me as it relates to CL V.

Is there anywhere in writing where it states who I am allowed to give my asset status report to or is there anywhere that states that I do not have to give my asset status report to another individual or unit besides my commander? I would like to have a regulation to back me up because most will challenge myself or anyone in an AO position that decides not to reveal that information.

KENT MACE5/7/2019 12:12 PMNo
Picture Placeholder: ROBERT LINN
14/27/2019 1:09 PM

​IAW with AIN 014-19 

Recovery of the FRTR is not designed or intended to be recovered. Question is what happens when these rounds are fired into a temporary impact area.

Per DAP 385-63
Those portions of temporary and dedicated impact areas authorized for training or other authorized purposes will be surface cleared of UXO before access is permitted. 

The AIN states that  Expended the Full Rand Practice (FRP) cartridges will be considered to be UXO's.

So if a Mortar unit fires 50,  60mm FRTR will EOD have to blow each mortar (50) fired into the temporary impact area?

LELAN WILLIAMS5/3/2019 11:45 AMNo
Picture Placeholder: TIM TRUMBLE
211/7/2018 12:22 PM

My QASAS has been telling me that there are drawings for Rotary Wing (sling) and Fixed Wing (463L pallet) movements.​  He quotes the 19-48 drawings which are for storage of single DODICs and outload  - like on a truck or in a MILVAN but the drawings don't account for mixed DODICs, nor various sized boxes w/in the same sling or on the same pallet, especially with limited rescources at an austere location (There are no Walmarts, Home Depots (limited lumber), etc. nearby).  In our situation, as the slings of mixed DODICs w/ different sizes and various weighted packages, which affects the center of gravity of the pallet gets lifted in the sling (also, how the corners of the pallet match up w/ the holes between the ropes of the sling can add to the twisting of the pallets of the ammo when the rotary wing asset lifts the sling) the pallets have twisted and the tensioned metal bands break.  The contractor has told me the broken banding can also cut/fray the sling making the sling not usable for future use and must then be replaced.  (By the way, what is the tension breaking strength of the various sizes of metal banding?)  The rotary wing contractor wants the pallets secured w/ ratched straps b/c the straps stretch w/o breaking while under stress.  That contractor says they have had metal banding break in flight for various reasons resulting in loose ammo in the sling and the contractor can't just set down IOT reconfigure the load adn doesn't want to drop ammo out of their sling which can become donor material to the bad guys.  When the rotary wing contractor comes in to set down the sling they are quite often under fire.  Inadvertantly they deliver the ammo w/ a thud (IOT leave the area quickly since they are not able to defend themselves.) 

The 19-48 drawings are for full pallets of the same DODIC, which works great for storage at Depots and loading onto trucks or into MILVANs  but not necessarily for Operational loads of smaller quantities of mixed DODICs.  A vast majority of units do not order Depot sized quantities or pallets of each DODIC.  Does anyone have a common sense answer to this delema?  The QASAS is writing up the contractor for packaging pallets of ammo as per sling yard guidance which is not abiding to the 1948 drawings.  The ASP contractor assists the units and gets them their ammo asap despite the contractor working outside their Statement of Work, by configured the ammo for sling loads and moving the ammo to the sling yard.  Most of the contract workers are former SM that worked ammo when they were serving, as such they understand as we do the need to provide the trigger puller ready, reliable, lethal ammunition quickly. 

The contract workers are packaging the unit's ammo as per the guidance from the sling yard personnel IOT quickly push the ammo to the Warfighter.  But the QASAS is writing the contractor up and pushing the write ups up their Chain of Command which is threatening contract renewal.  

What has been a 3 day process to issue/fly ammo to the Warfighter is going to be extended to about 3 weeks b/c the contractor, not wanting to be written up for assisting Soldiers by configuring the unit's ammo in a way they are not required is saying they will stop b/c they don't want to be written up.  A work around has been suggested for the ASP contractor to still assist units by creating HAZDECs, helping prep the Unit's ammo (they've signed for the ammo) to the sling yards requirments, but the unit will have to cordinate movement to the sling yard.  However, most units do not have the necessary support at our location (LNOs) to prepare HAZDECs or move ammo from the ASP to the sling yard/flight line.  Still working out the details of this work around.  The contractor workers are not happy w/ this option of not being able to  openly help the Warfighter to the fullest extent b/c the QASAS is so focused upon drawings that don't apply in all situations.  

My concern is, the Warfighter probably does not have enough on hand stocks as the pipeline becomes 18 + or - days longer.  So if anyone has suggestions for load out drawings for the contractor for smaller quantities of various DODICs IOT prevent my QASAS from complaining it would be greatly appreciated.  The contract workers want to help the warfighter and by stepping back will cause the sling yard Soldiers to become overworked b/c they don't have the personel for the increase in workload.  And w/ the Boots On Ground numbers being examined.  I'm fearful the sling yard will lose more personnel while their workload is about to increase since the ASP workers aren't being allowed to assist.  Yet my QASAS writes up the contractor, who has been doing the work, wants to assist the warfighter, and who's numbers don't go against the BOG.  Help!  Seeking common sense solutions in a forward environment.

SPENCER HOVEY3/20/2019 4:02 PMNo
Picture Placeholder: BRIAN FARMER
111/21/2018 9:17 AM

How does one submit an article for the newsletter?​

Picture Placeholder: JACQUELINE GARCIA
18/3/2018 1:35 PM

Tim: Is there any regulatory guidance at any level saying No weapons into an ASP? To me guards potentially make sense b/c they are getting extra weapons training as per AR 190-14 but accidents do occur. That's why they're called accidents. I just don't want an accident to become a catastrophe.



Picture Placeholder: BRENT DUBOIS
16/7/2018 3:01 PM

USAEHA TG 146.pdfDwg 13064136.pdf

The attached documents will clarify some misinformation circulated regarding wood preservative treatments.

Wood treated with pentachlorophenol is indicated by a "P" marking (Ref USAEHA TG 146 attached).  Pentachlorophenol is no longer used as a wood preservative and has been replaced by alternatives such as Copper-8-quinolinolate, zinc naphthenate, and copper naphthenate.

IAW Dwg 13064136 these alternative treatments that are currently authorized can be recognized by the following markings -

  • PA - Copper-8-quinolinolate
  • PB -  Zinc naphthenate
  • PC - Copper naphthenate

A PS Magazine Article (PS 677) as well as the DA Pam 742-1 22Nov2016 erroneously indicate that PA, PB & PC are  pentachlorophenol treated.

ELLEN MERWITZ8/9/2018 10:50 AMNo
Picture Placeholder: THEODORE MCHUGH
26/29/2018 6:42 PM

​I am trying to find out if their are any courses out there that cover blocking and bracing of ammunition shipments.  While I was in the Army the B&B crew was also the R&U, when I worked at SDDC ports it was union carpenter labor, and now I have a different crew, but they have no formal training. 

The DTR says all personnel involved in the handling, repackagiing, and loading operations have to be properly trained and recommends ( but I can never get that link to work.

I have been to AMMO-62 and have taken AMMO-51, and done the  Defense Basic Preservation and Packing (online) from DAC.....none of these cover blocking and bracing.  Any suggestions where I can look for this training?  Is there really a formal requirement..or just suggestions and recommendations?




Picture Placeholder: STEPHEN ANDERSON
17/10/2018 4:18 PM

​Is the Explosives Safety Mishap Analysis Module still working?  I previously had access.  However, the link to the ESMAM does not populate for me.

ELLEN MERWITZ7/11/2018 1:52 PMNo
Picture Placeholder: JAMES BREWER
25/13/2018 10:00 AM


I am looking for a cross reference of DODICs that require humidity Indicators, and the HI part numbers/NSN's.

GUINDAL CROLEY6/13/2018 3:28 PMNo
Picture Placeholder: MICHAEL BROWN
16/7/2018 7:13 PM

​It used to be that CAD/PAD items were only accounted for on Hand Receipt when uninstalled from the aircraft.  Once installed on the aircraft they were accounted for as part of the -17 aircraft inventory and did not require formal Propery Book accountability.

Can anyone point me to any type of doctrinal regulation, pamphlet, circular, letter, memorandum, or any typ of guidance that indicates that CAD/PAD items do not require such formal accountability once installed?


JANA WHITELAW6/12/2018 7:54 AMNo
Picture: rzeleznik
  • rzeleznik
15/16/2018 12:25 PM

​This is a test, please ignore. - Rick Zeleznik

rzeleznik5/16/2018 12:58 PMNo
Picture Placeholder: JACQUELINE GARCIA
04/30/2018 3:38 PM


Although some vape oils may contain CBD oil, CBD, THC and/or synthetic cannabinoids, many vape oils do not disclose that they may contain illegal and/or potentially hazardous substances. Therefore, even consumers who may not be seeking products containing CBD oil, CBD, THC or other synthetic cannabinoids may unintentionally purchase and use them.

The US Army Public Health Center has sent out this powerpoint and the Army has released ALARACT 029/2018, HEALTH EFFECTS OF VAPE OILS CONTAINING UNKNOWN SUBSTANCES as guidance.

4/30/2018 3:38 PMNo
Picture Placeholder: JACQUELINE GARCIA
33/28/2018 5:03 PM

The Army and Air Force Exchange is selling small arms ammunition in their retail department. Is DA Pam 385-64, paragraph 2-11 or other explosive safety standards applicable to the Exchange’s sale of ammunition? Should an explosive license be issued?

Read the guidance USATECS has provided in the attached document.

AAFES Sale of Ammunition -Explosives Safety Bulletin 2010.pdf 

Contributed by Mr. Thomas

ELLEN MERWITZ4/4/2018 3:57 PMNo
1 - 20Next

 Frequently Needed