104 10215 10146

14-00000. 104-10215-10146 2025 RELEASE UNDER THE PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY ASSASSINATION RECORDS ACT OF 1992

S-E-C-R-E-T

ATTACHMENT #2

TRAINING REPORT

TEAM/GROUP: PBRUMEN II (211 hours, full-time) 11 July - 13 August 1966 (Date)

Student: FRANK 56

COURSE OBJECTIVE AND CONTENT

This course is designed to train indigenous personnel in paramilitary resistance activities and intelligence collection operations in denied areas. Approximately 70% of the student's time is devoted to practical work and field exercises and 30% to the theoretical aspects essential for a logical understanding and application of training covered during the course.

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION * U - Unsatisfactory Performance is so low in relation to requirements of the work as to be unequivocally below minimum standards.

W - Weak Achieved minimum standards, but less than adequate (in terms of indigenous personnel participating in the program).

A - Adequate Has achieved the basic level required. Satisfactory, characterized neither by deficiency nor excellence.

P - Proficient More than satisfactory. Has acquired a solid beginner's proficiency. This rating may be interpreted as representing "average" on our rating scale.

S - Strong Exceptional proficiency, characterized by thorough- ness, initiative, originality, and an exceptional student understanding and application of paramilitary resistance activities.

O - Outstanding Performance is so exceptional in relation to require- ments of the work and in comparison to the performance of other students doing similar work as to warrant special recognition.

  • Modification of the Office of Training standard rating scale at the specific request of JMWAVE.

S-E-C-R-E-T 14-00000

S-E-C-R-E-T FRANK

HOURS RATING 1. MAP READING (ABILITY TO REPORT LOCATIONS USING GRID COORDINATES) 12 P

  1. NAUTICAL CHARTS 8 P

  2. WEAPONRY (U.S. & FOREIGN) 31 P

  3. CLANDESTINE MOVEMENT - -

  4. RESISTANCE ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS 20 P

  5. AMBUSH TACTICS AND OPERATIONS 24 S

  6. RAID TACTICS AND OPERATIONS 24 P

  7. CACHING 20 P

  8. CLANDESTINE MOVEMENT LINES (E&E) - -

  9. OBSERVATION AND DEPORTING TECHNIQUES 40 S

  10. LEADERSHIP TRAITS AND CAPABILITY See Comments

  11. OPERATIONAL PLANNING ABILITY See Comments

  12. SKETCHING 12 A

  13. SABOTAGE (SEE ATTACHED STB REPORT) - -

  14. TARGET PHOTOGRAPHY - -

  15. AIR RECEPTION ACTIVITIES 20 P

  16. WEAPONS QUALIFICATION (TEST RESULTS ATTACHED) Pistol Non-Applicable Rifle Sharpshooter SMG Sharpshooter

OVERALL PERFORMANCE RATING LETTER P

Rating takes into account trainee's effectiveness, such as performance in operational skills, tactics, techniques, leadership, planning, teamwork, motivation and limitations.

2 S-E-C-R-E-T 14-00000

S-E-C-R-E-T FRANK

The ratings above, and narrative comments hereunder, are derived from a synthesis of all evaluations submitted on each respective trainee by the instructor staff.

Overall performance ratings of all students in this class were as follows: WEAK 0 ADEQUATE 0 PROFICIENT 6 STRONG 0 OUTSTANDING 0

NARRATIVE COMMENTS

Over-all, FRANK was the most conscientious and hardest working student in his class. His serious attitude and fine performance warranted a highly proficient rating.

In preparation of plans, completion of written exercises, and execution of field problems, he demonstrated a high level of achievement.

During the Ambush Exercise, FRANK had a leadership role during which he adhered to a detailed plan, exerted good control over the team, and produced a very successful ambush operation.

FOR THE DIRECTOR OF TRAINING:

PREPARED BY: APPROVED AND FORWARDED:

erome M. Greiner JOSEPH M. HUDACEK 8/30/66 JEROME W. GREINER Chief Instructor Date Project Officer

3 S-E-C-R-E-T 14-00000

FRANK- Frank was the hardest working student of the group. He con- sistently applied himself to all phases of the training with equal and great diligence. However, his practical work, which took him a great deal of time to perform, was always a little sloppy. When Frank crimped detonators or threw improvised grenades, he was very shaky. However, he did not seem at all nervous about working with other hazardous material. He asked many pertinent questions which contributed to the group's training and always answered test questions correctly and in detail. He was cooperative and reacted well to correction. Some supervision was required since the staff instructors were concerned about his nervousness with detonators. His overall performance was rated as proficient.

SECRET