You are on page 1of 31
INSPECTOR GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 44800 MARK CENTER DRIVE ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINA. 22360-1500 MAR 04 2016 Ref: FOLA-2015-00496 Mr. Gregg Zoroya USA Today 7950 Jones Branch Drive MoLean, VA 22108 Dear Mr. Zoroya This is in response to your March 30, 2015, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for a copy of DODIG-2015-097, Evaluation of DoD Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) for Support to Civil Authorities, We received your request on March 30, 2015, and assigned it case number FOIA-2015-00496. ‘The Office of the Deputy Inspector General for Intelligence and Special Program, Assessments conducted a search and located the enclosed documents. I determined that some redacted portions of the records are exempt from release pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6), which pertains to information, the release of which would constitute a cleatly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Mr, Paul R. Polk, Initial Denial Authority for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Ageney, determined that some redacted portions are exempt from release pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3), which pertains to nondisclosure provisions contained in other Federal Statutes, In this ease, the Federal statute which prevents disclosure is 50 U.S.C, § 3142, which exempts from disclosure operational files of the National Cicospatial-Intelligence Agency. Colonel Chistian Rofrano, Chief Counsel at the National Guard Bureau, determined that some redacted portions of the document are exempt from release pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(B), which pertains to records or information that would reveal techniques ‘and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions or that would disclose guidelines for Iaw enforcement investigations or proseeutions if disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law. In view of the above, you may consider this to be an adverse determination that may be appealed to the Department of Defense, Office of Inspector General, ATTN: FOIA Appellate Authority, Suite 10824, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Alexandria, VA 22350-1500. Your appeal, if any, must be postmarked within 30 days of the date of this letter and should reference the file number above. [recommend that your appeal and its envelope both bear the notation “Freedom of Information Act Appeal.” Sincerely, Acting Division Chief FOIA, Privacy and Civil Liberties Office Pa aaa ge [aed Ninoy Coal ee otetd Evaluation of DoD's Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) for Support to Civil Authorities INTEGRITY & EFFICIENCY # ACCOUNTABILITY * EXCELLENCE Mission Our iission is to provide independent, relevant, and timely oversight of the Department of Defense that supports the warfighters promotes ‘accountability, integrity, and efficiency; advises the Secretary of Defense and Congress; and informs the public Vision ‘Our'vision ts to be a model oversight organization In the Federal Government by leading change, speaking truth, and promoting excellence—a diverse organization, working together as one professtonal team, recognized as leaders in our field. Fraud, Waste & Abuse a HOTLINE ei 9g W Department of Defense dodig.mil/hotline woos or more information about whistleblower protection, please soe the inside back cover, POR-OPFIGHAL USE-ONEY Results in Brief Seo CRE uae f Unmanned Alreraft Systems (YAS) for Tana Oe ont March .20, 2015 (U) Objective (U Our objective was to determine whether Dob polices and procedues for using DoD {UAS and associated processing explokaton, and dissemination activities comply with applicable laws, regulations, and national policies for providing supporto domestic io authorites, (U) Finding (U) 090 ts fully compliant with laws, ‘regulations, and national polictes for VAS support to domestic civil suthorities, + U)Units operating UASs told us that while they understand the ‘American public's legitimate concerns about evil liberties and privacy rights, they do not operate UASsany differently from manned platforms with similar capabilities. ist us at www.dodig.rail (U} Recommendations ‘© (F@¥E}We recommend that USD (P) establish a standardized {formal approval process for UAS support to domestic civil authorities ‘+ 646}We recommend that USD (P) address the concerns of Miltary Service/National Guard Bureau UAS experts that policy ambigulty fs potentially degrading UAS training and operational, readiness, + (20U0}We also recommend that the USD (P) formally charter the Domestic Imagery Working Group. ({U) Management Comments and Our Response (U) The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Policy, Homeland Defense & Global Security concurred with our recommendations, and no further comments are required, Please see the Recommendations Table on the noxt page. oport Ne BUDH-2015.097 (5 FOR-OFFIGIAL-USE-ONEY Recommendations Table herent ec ete Under Secretary of Defense for re 123 Lepr 0, 0016-20459 FPEOR-GPFIGIALUSE-ONLY INSPECTOR GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF DUFENSE 4800 MARK CENTER DRIVE ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA 22350-1600 ‘March 20,2015 MEMORANDUM FOR SECRETARY OF DEFENSE UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR POLICY SUBJECT: (U) valuation of Dod's Use of Unmanned Alrcraft Systems for Support to ‘Civil Authorles (Report No. DODIG-2015-097) (W) The Deputy 6, Antetigonce and Speclal Program Assessments (1SPA) Is providing for your faformation and use. isroport (U) We considered management comments ona draft ofthis report when proparing the fnal oport, Comments from the Ofco of Assistant Secretary of Dofons for Policy, Homeland Dofense & Global Security wore rosponsive forall recommendations, (U) We appreciate the courtesies exten Please direct quastions to me at (703) oOo +703) 655 9 Program Assesements 2015097 (ae Contents (U) Introduction (0) Objective... (Wy aaderoend. (U) Scopeand Meth (U) Finding. (#0U6) DoD te Fully Commpiane with Laws, Regulations, and Natlonal Policies for UAS Supporto Clvl Authors. a nenmecn (W)Statutory Envtronment for Employrant of DoD UAS In Domestic OperatONS neem (W)Offce ofthe Secretary of Defense Unmanned AlreraftSystem Policy and Guidance. (U)DoD UASSupport to Gill Authorities Brent. (#040) DoD Does Not Have a Standardized Approval Process for UAS Support to Domestic Chil Authorities, (#040) Service and National Guar UAS Experts Expressed Concer that Policy Ambigalty1s Potentially Degtadiag UAS Training and Operational Readines5.nmnenwnwnnsnuannnnni {U)hnpact of DoD UASPlicy on Processing, Explain, nd Dsseminatlon fo" DSCA an (U) The Doineste Imagery Working OUP mmm @)Concasion.. {F0U0} Recommendations Management Comments, and OU Response om {U) Management Comments Asstt Secretary of Defense for PA) anmm Appendixe: {U)DOD Ofoes Viste ngenennnnenn (0) Unl’sVistted and Location anew (0) Use of Computer-Processed D8 oun ainn (U) Prior Coverage. {U) Acronyms and Abbreviations. se yuri Ne WON 7918-097 | datrartuesion (U) Introduction ( ovjecive (U) Our objective was to determine whether DoD policies and procedures for using DoD unmanned aireraft systems (UAS) and associated processing, exploitation, and dissemination (PED) activities comply with applicable laws, regulations, and national policies for providing support to domestic civil authorities. (U) Background (U) During the last 10 years, the quantities and types of UAS acquired by the Milltary Services have increased, Their capabilities, along with PED enhancements, have become integral to warfighter operations across the spectrum of conflict. ‘The prevalence and uses of unmanned systems continue to grow at a dramatic pace. ‘The past decade of conflict has seon the greatest {increase in UAS, primarily performing Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) missions, Use of unmanned systoms in other domains is growing as well The growth of unmanned systems use is ‘expected to continue across most domains, Unmanned systems have proven they enhance situational awareness, reduce human workload, Improve mission performance, and minimize overall risk to. both civilian and military porsonnel and all ta reduced cost.t (U) Effective use of these unmanned capabilities requires highly-trained UAS vehicle operators, sensor and payload operators, and analysts to process, exploft, and disseminate the data collected. The Military Services train all UAS personnel at various * bob, “Unarmed SntensintegiatedReadnap F 20132038" FOR-GERIGHLSEONLY roduetion (U) locations around the country. The training is specifically designed to ensure that UAS’ and personnel can be operationally employed to satisfy combatant commanders’ overseas warfighting requirements, More than ton years of wor in the combat zones of Iraq and Afghanistan have taught a generation of Airman valuable lessons about the use of Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA? and other ISR assets. The lesson yet to bo learned, however, is that this battle space experience is not Aicocty applicable to operations in the US. As the nation winds down these wars, and USAF RPA and ISR assets become available to support other combatant command (COCOM) or US. agencles, the appetite to use them In the domestic environment to collet airborne imagery continues to grow, as does Congressional and media interéstin ther employment? (U) Scope and Methodology (U) The evaluation was conducted in accordance with Quality Standards for Inspection and Evaluation issued by the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency. Those standards require that we plan and perform the evaluation to obtain ‘sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and. conclusions based on our evaluation objectives, (U) Our evaluation included a review of Federal Statutes, DoD policy and directives, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instructions, Service policy and directives, and, National Guard Bureau (NGB) policy and directives, We also conducted interviews with personnel from across the Department responsible for policies and procedures for the ‘conduct of UAS operations (See the Appendix). * The USA uses the erm Remetay Pate Arcratinsed of UA. » “protect Seconty ond Pac: Aelia Framework for Atborne Domest agen” (Colonel Dawn AMX, 218, USAF, USAF aw Revie, Veh 70 opt No, BOHOL WWF 12 FOR OFFIGHAL-USE-ONLY Finding, (U) Finding (FEUO}DaD ts Fully Compliant with Laws, Regulations, and National Policies for UAS Support to Civil Authorities, {(FOUO) We found no evidence that any DoD entity using UAS's or associated PED {In support of domestic civil authorities, to date, has violated or is not in ‘compliance with all statutory, policy, or intelligence oversight requirements. (U) We visited a cross-section of National Guard, U.S. Army, US, Navy, US, Marine Corps, and US. Ait Force operational UAS and Intelligence units that have capabilities or responsibilities for processing UAS collected information. These unit visits or “spot checks” were conducted to determine the personnels level of understanding arid compliance with DoD policy and Service directives for employing DoD UAS in support of civil authorities, (U) Statutory Environment for Employment of DoD UAS in Domestic Operations (U) There are various controlling federal statues that define what the DoD is authorized to provide to domestic civil authorities. They include Title 10, Title 32, Title 42, and ‘Title $0, ‘There are no federal statutes that specifically address the employment of the ‘capability provided by a DoD UAS Ifrequested by domestic civil authorities. ‘Therefore, Sectons27s, 262, 2564944, and chapter 3 of he 1, United Sates Code tl 3, Unt state Code; Suction Coh-11 nd 5223, and Chapa 5A of he 4, Und Sates Cove; ie 5, United states Codes Exseutvo Order 12333, "Untied tatsntignne Actes” December 4, 981, asaranded DD $240.18, “rocedres Goveting te atts DoD lteligence Components That Alec ned State Patong" evebe 1982; Deb Dvectve 3025.18, “Defense Suppet oC autho,” December 29,2010; DEPSECOEF Memerandam “tern Gudece forthe Dares Use of Unmanned Aca Stems” Septomber 28,2006, Hopoct a, HODIE-2015-997 POR-GFFICHALUSE-GNEY Hindi DoD and the Military Services have developed a policy framework for the domestic use (U) ofthe UAS capability in accordance with the authorities granted for generic defense support, The framework also covers executive level policies that were developed to protect fully the legal rights ofall United States persons, including freedoms, civil liberties, and privacy rights guaranteed by Federal law. (U) Given that the primary operational mission of the majority of DoD UAS assets is the collection of intelligence, DoD UAS domestic operations are also subjectto Executive Order 12333, “United States intelligence Activities,” and DoD Directive 5240.1-R, “Procedures Governing the Activites of DoD Intelligence Components That Affect United States Persons, December 1982." {U) Office of the Secretary of Defense Unmanned Aircraft System Policy and Guidance (U) Inaddition to the Intelligence Oversight directives, DoD UAS continental U.S, operations are conducted under a unique DoD policy directive, On September 28, 2006, the Deputy Secretary of Defence signed the "Intorim Guidance for the Domestic Use of ‘Unmanned Aircraft Systems.” ‘The purpose was to ensure that DoD UASare used in accordance with US. law and departmental framework, The directive also identifies the appropriate use of DoD UAS assets in domestic operations. This guidance applies to all DoD UAS, used in domestie operations, whether operated by Active, Reserve, National Guard, or other personnel. § * Whe thi memorandum dtd the ASD Ply, omebd Defense, te detlop a morecomprehetshe poley ocumantforDomastc Use of Unmanned Arcralt Syste." when i sessment been, the 200 iter eldnce ‘enaled the gllng DoD poly ar domestic URS opertns. tana No OD ZUG O47 | FOR-GEHCIALHSH ONLY (U) The interim policy encourages the use of DoD UAS to support appropriate domestic mission sets, including homeland defense and Defense Support of Civil Authorities {DSCA}. DoD Directive 3025,18, “Defense Support of Civil Authorities,” September 21, 2012, is the guiding DSCA policy document for the DoD. “DSCA is support provided by US. Federal military forces, DoD civilians, DoD contract personnel, DoD Component assets, and, in coordination ‘with the Governors, federally funded National Guard forces in response to requests for assistance from civil authorities for domestic ‘emergencles, law enforcement support, and other domestic activities, ‘or from qualifying entities for‘spectat events.” {U) The interim policy is highly restrictive on actual authorization, Itspeciically forbids the use of DoD UAS for DSCA operations, including support to Federal, State, | local, and tribal government organizations, unless expressly approved by the Secretary | of Defense (SECDEF), or designate, Interviews with Assistant Secretary of Defense for | Homeland Defense and America's Security Affairs personnel indicate that, to date, the SECDEF has not delegated this approval authority. (U) Military Service and National Guard Bureau implementation and Execution of DoD UAS Policy (V) Our interviews with Military Service and NGB personnel revealed that they operate UAS of various capabilities and configurations and approach the employment of UAS for DSCA differently, primarily because of Service culture and overall UAS operational experience, (U) We reviewed all Service DSCA directives and found that while each Service has ‘overarching doctrine, policy, or instructions for implementing OSD directives for DSC their implementation of OSD policy on UAS use for DSCA varies greatly. For example, US, Army FM 3-28, “Civil Support Operations, Appendix H, UAS in Civil Support," August 2010, states that*,.all requests for UAS must be approved by the Secretary of {U) Defense.” On the other hand, U.S. Air Force, Air Combat Command Instruction ‘fens Supper of i Arhetes(OCA), teragenc Parnes Gul, Ap 2033, feof the Asta Secretary of Defense (melon Defense & Areas’ Sec Ais) tuport Ne, HODKG-Z0U9 09? | FOR-OFFIGHE-USE-ONLY Finding, 10-810, “Operations Involving Domestic Imagery Support Request Procedures for U.S. Missions," December 2013, states that"..use of intelligence, survellance, and reconnaissance, operations reconnafssance; and remotely piloted aireraft, particularly for DSCA missions operating collection systems outside of DoD-controlled airspace within the US, may? require Secretary of Defense approval.” The U.S. Navy and the U.S. Marine Corps do not currently have specific directives or instructions for UAS use for DSCA. The NGB DSCA directives for UAS employment isa reflection of their Service affllation, es Air National Guard wnlts comply wlth U.S. Air Force.instructions and ‘Army National Guard units comply with US, Army UAS directives. (U) DoD UAS Support to Civil Authorities Events ¢FOU0} We began our evaluation by requesting from cach of the Military Services and the NGB all examples of instances where a DoD WAS haid been employed in support of civil authorities in the continental U.S. or US. Territories from September 28, 2006, to the present, These dates were chosen to coincide with the release of the current interim guidance for UAS support to domestic civil authorities, We requested that for ‘each instance the following data should be provided: date of request, requesting authority, summary of request, approval process with documentation, summary of event, and any lessons learned if applicable. We also asked for denied requests. (F0UO}-This data call resulted in a relatively short collated list of less than twenty events that could be categorized as DoD UAS supportto domestic civil authorities, The list consisted of both approved and disapproved requests, We then interviewed both Service and NGB Headquarters personnel who processed these requests up through the Service approval process to OSD. During our unit visits we also discussed these events with the unit commanders to understand how they viewed the approval process, as well as how the interim guidance policy impacted the actual support request. * pha ded, eee es DOD. 20156097 8 incting, ¢POHO} Service and NGB Headquarters representatives told us that each of the DoD UAS support requests was processed differently. A number of the approval requests were processed through normal DoD training event channels that are managed by the joint staff. A few were processed through Service channels working with OSD. And we heard that some were handled directly between the OSD staf, SECDEF, and civil authorities telephonically. We were unable to uncover any formal documentation procedures that defined the end-to-end approval process. We were told that this ad hoc process contributed to anxiety among the Service and NGB unit commanders about when they hhad the authority to employ thelr UAS resources as requested. {FOUE}DoD Does Not Have a Standardized Approval Process for UAS Support to Domestic Civil Authorities. {FOU} While the current OSD interim guidance for DoD UAS Support to Civil Authorities provides guidance on UAS employmentand when to request SECDEF approval it does not provide a mechanism for how to process that request. SA POR-OFFIGHME-USE-ONLY. eepont to, BOBS 215.097 [4 {FEUS}Service and National Guard UAS Experts | Expressed Concern that Policy Ambiguity Is Potentially Degrading UAS Training and Operational Readiness. (FOUO} Multiple units told us that as forces using UAS capabilities continue to draw down overseas, opportunities for UAS realistic training and use have decreased. UAS ‘unit commanders explained that providing UAS supporto civil authorities could yield ‘more realistic training opportunities and increase operational readiness. However, ‘multiple commanders also stated that as a result ofthe restrictive approval procossos for domestic UAS use, policy confusion, and internal Service hesitations, potential taining opportunities are missed, | (POURFUSAF roprosentatives told us that the OSD policy makes it difficult to dotermine what training is acceptable for DSCA UAS missions. For example, a unit submitted a request tose a remotely piloted aircraft (MQ-1 Predator and/or MQ-9 Reaper) to support incident awareness and assessment duting fire season training with the | Department of Energy. The unitwas informed that although the training met the ‘qualifications expressed in the Air Combat Command Domestic Imagery Training Propor Use Memorandum (PUM) the activity was classified as DSCA, since this was, | support for wild fires toan outside agency and, therefore, required SECDEF approval. Since the request was for incident awareness and assessinent during the entire fire season, the unit chose not to pursue blanket approval because of what they felt was ‘an onerous approval process. | (FOH9}-Another example was provided by the Army and Alr National Guard. In this case,a DSCA exercise was proposed (0 [iii rapes Use Mena/ends a memorandum signed emul yan ogaialn'scertyngpoveramentafal hat etnes ‘the oreaiations domes insgey cequrementsandiniended we, tals cons 8 rope ute sateen. ‘inowedggavacenessof the egal ang poy rests regadigdomestciigory, AF 26204, 23 Apr 2032 apart No, BODE: 2015.097 1S POR OFFIGIALUSE-ONEY Finding, {20U0}.We were also told about a DSCA training exercise with the Department of Energy using a U.S, Air Force remotely piloted aircraft that was conducted without formal SECDEF approval, This exercise was for incident awareness and assessment supportof a simulated hazardous materia release on Department of Energy property. ‘The training met all ofthe internal Service guidelines and was forwardled for approval. However, since the exercise was conducted within DoD restricted airspace, the Joint Staff determined that approval was not required, Our interviewees explained that this Jeft them confused about just when the OSD policy requiring SECDEF approval of UAS supportfor DSCA applied. {FOUO}-Finally, a US, Marine Corp UAS unit told us that once each month thelr wing. hosts community leadership program where local politicians are invited to view and learn about the capabilities ofthe various aircraft on base. During one such event,a local mayor requested UAS supporto look: for potholes in the area, While the unit conceded that this type of operation could provide realistic training for their pilots and sensor operators, local commanders determined that under the interim guidance, requesting SECDEF approval to conduct a UAS mission of this type did not make operational sense, (U) Impact of DoD UAS Policy on Processing, Exploitation, and Dissemination for DSCA (£040}-Along with interviewing various units operating UASs, we also interviewed organizations responsible for performing the PED of UAS collected data. We met with National Geospatial intelligence Agency (NGA) personnel responsible for ensuring that NGA and other Defense Intelligence Components comply with the domestic collection of tactical imagery consistent with DoD 5240.1-R. While NGA does not operate UASs they «do provide PED support to DoD DSCA and other Federal agency UAS operations within the United States. A A 8e. DOMKS 2015-097 | Heine (POUO}US. Air Force units operating UASs rely on the Air Force Distributed Common Ground System (DCGS) for thelr PED support. We visited the 480 Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Wing and two subordinate DCGS elements to capture theirprocesses for DSCA UAS PED support. The Wing executes any DSCA support rission according to tasking from USNORTHCOM, USNORTHCOM Contingency Plan 3501, DSCA, serves as the COCOM’s plan for DoD responses to civil requests for ‘support including ISR asset support. The 480! Wing has no formal pollcy for DSCA support, but does comply with Air Combat Command Instruction 10-810, “Operations Involving Domestic Imagery Support Request Procedures,” for US Missions as well as US. Air Force and DoD Intelligence Oversight directives. {POUO}The U.S. Navy and U.S, Marine Corps currently have no UAS-specific policies for domes UAS PD SS (£086) The U.S, Army also does not have UAS-specific polices for domestic UAS PED. However, because current USA policy prohibits UAS civil support outside of DoD managed alrspace, they feel that compliance with all applicable intelligence oversight regulations is suficient to meet OSD policy guldance, (U) The Domestic Imagery Working Group {U) During our evaluation we also observed how the Services and NGB are working together to address some of the challenges associated with the current OSD policy on the DoD domestic UAS use for DSCA. We discovered that an informal body, known as ‘the Domestic Imagery Working Group (DIWG), was attempting to address some of the concerns raised by the UAS units. The DIWGis a cross-functional and multi-service Yorpore N00 005.047 [7 FOR-OPFIGHEUSE-ONDY vanliog {informal working group consisting of lawyers, operators, intelligence professtonals, and policy makers formed to address the collection of domestic imagery. We interviewed multiple members of the DIWG and heard that the group was originally created to help determine the approval authorities required to conduct the collection of domestic imagery by all airbortte ISR collection assets, including UAS, Over time the DIWG narrowed its focus to address DoD UAS support to civil authorities and informally ‘captures lessons learned and best practices that are shared among the Services and. NBG. ‘The DIWG has produced a number of recommendations on UAS employment processes and legal guldes to help the Services ensure policy compliance. Presently, the DIWGis championed by USAF representatives, but each ofthe Services and NGB participate, The DIWG is a best practice that should be leveraged to assist the policy and Service communities in addressing the unique challenges of operating UAS In the US. (U) Conclusion {FOUO) We concluded that DoD takes the issue of DoD UAS support to domestic civil authorities very seriously, Great care fs taken by DoD personinel to protect the American public's civil liberties and privacy rights while simultaneously preparing to ‘employ VAS capabilities as required by National Command Authorities. Our review of UAS policy implementation across the department, coupled with our unit visits to discuss actual events, did not reveal evidence that any DoD entity has employed a UAS or conducted PED in support of domestic civil authorities contrary to laws, regulations, cor national policies. [should be noted that the units operating UASs across the department told us that, while they understand the American public's legitimate concerns about civil liberties and privacy rights, they do not operate UASs any differently from manned platforms with siniilar capabilities. (FEUE} Recommendations, Management Comments, and Our Response {FOUO}Recommendation 1 (#0U9) We recommend that USD (P) establish a standardized formal approval process for UAS support to domestic civil authorities. ert to, BOPKG-2015.097 J lng Hote Assistant Global Security {FOUO) ASD (P) concurred withthe recommendation and stated that Deputy Secretary of Defense Policy ‘Memorandum 15-002, “Guidanco forthe Domestic Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systoms February 17,2045, auddresses this ssue, They als stated thay wil continue to work with the Miltary Services and National ‘Guard Bureau to advess any uncertainty Inthe approval process. etary of Defense for Policy. Homeland Defense & (4) Our Response (U) Cominents from the ASD (P) are responsive to our recommendation. The Deputy Secretary of Defense Policy Memorandum 15-002, whlch is an update tothe 2006 “Tnterim Guldance for the Domestic Use of ‘Unmanned Aircraft Systeins’ provides the necessary clarity tothe Miltary Services and National Guard Bureau on the approval process for UAS support to domestic authors. fFEUG}Recommendation 2 (£948) We recommend that USD (P) address the concer of Miltary Servico/National Guard Bureau ‘UAS experts that policy ambiguity is potentially degrading UAS training and operational readiness. Hove PAssistant S Global Security {£0U9}-ASD (P) concurrod with the recommendation ai stated that Deputy Secrataryof Defense Polley Memorandum 15-002, "Guldance for tne Domestic Use of Unmanned Alrraf Systems’, February 17,2015, addresses this issue retary of Defense Jor Policy, Homeland Defense & {U) Our Response (0) Cones from the ASD (Pare responsive to dur commendation. The Deputy Secretary of Defense Polly Memorandum 15-002 has addressed the majority of Ue Miltary Services and Natlonal Guard Bureau's concerns about pole ambigaty impacting UAS training and operational readiness. fFOUO}Recommendation 3 {£0U0) Wo also recommend thatthe USD (P) formally charter the Domestic Imagery Working Group. (oIwe) +#PAUOL Assistuit Secretary of Defense far Polley, Homeland Defense & Global Security {FOUG}-ASD (P) concurred in principle to formally chartering the DIWG, They will work with the DIWG lead Service to develop the appropiata working group lederst construc to champion DoD UAS iniatves (U) Our Response (U) Comments from the ASD (P) are vesponsive to our raconumendation. Tho DIWG was "best practice" ‘Mentited during our evaluation, KG 2018-097 $9 Ropar Ni FOR-OFFIGIAL-USE-ONLY nagenvent Cormants (U) Management Comments Assistant Secretary of Defense for Policy {INCLAMIIMED/POR OFFICIAL UNE ONLY. [MEMORANDUM POR INSPFCTOR GLNEXALOF 114 DEPARINENT OF DEFENSE SUBILCL: Han of DD's Ue ono At eso Ch ‘Raho rerio TOO {noo unk our pry aes our endef aD Lsanied natal Spares UAB aman toch shut, pent ea Vth {steno Wetele in coscneaufl as cnmendetoa se ‘Senda Feary 1.2018, ep) See of Drone Pes Meonmgtn 15-00 “Gnlneforthe ere Ure Unrate Amat Sem” Were wa sib Moy Secs wn Maal Card as ey nen coe (404 Rng mses fe rin ona ce foaty tantra og Woy ihe Nene ea Splemercontempercr enter strpsonnteche DBS yoru he a sr fsa trons tora ab cae eb Roe est ‘rte Fey Monod 1.02 LUNCLASSIINDIFOR OREM -UEHONEAE Teeont to. 100 2048-097 | Wo Management Comments perurys Feta 1.2018 MIAO ANDRA FOR SFERETARIES OF THE MILITARY DEPARTANINTS ‘CHARAN GF THE JOINT CIES GF STAT ‘UND SECKKTARY OF DEFENSE FOR ACOUSTION, “TecHNOLOAy, AND LodEstiCS UNDER SEChL TARY OF OLFENST FOR POLICY. UNDER SeCR:TARYOF DEFENSE FOR PENSONREL AND ADO UNDUR SECRETARY OF DEIENSE Fo re LIEN {COMMANDI. US, NORTIEEN COAND COMMANDER US, PACFICCOMNIAND. CHICE, NATIONAL HUARD BUREAU. ‘GENERAL COUNSEL OF NIE DEPARNENT OF DEFENS [SSRIMTART 91030 TARY OF DIFESSEFORIEGISLATIOE "AFFAIRS DDEPARGIENE OF Drs CINE FyFORNATIONOH CER AtGISt ANT TO THE SECRETARY OF DFTENSEFOR PLLC TATFARS siMOR INTELLIGENCE OVERSIGHT OFFICER, SUIECT: Pele Memerendon 10, “Calne forte Demat Ui oF mand ‘Neca son [EXIORATION DATE: Ply 17,2018 DOIN OF CONTACT: term mtn coael OASDCIDAS) ASIN OS “Ta pati oenendam pve glues fhe demesne cf nated sea suena Cnt pet et fered) Unseen soe oh {US ten at aD poly, ants eae epprepiao we ofa UAS etl cae etal tang exrhes wed ‘Ved domed von mention ue! een Dete (HD, Des Supe of ‘cu Atte (DSCA) ending dence. Ursin provid piri: cesta insole ety of ee id rl seeing i BRC ell Ga 0) se cong DoD UAS epi NG pn nT Bor Sue Are Dy Sica, ig etna fb ps nate ia bets ton ‘Adriaan (FAN) ard abe oe Np yen ad torn ‘tape concen option of UNS te Naor Alper Siem (WAS). Ts {knee ples eal UAS wa ete Une Ste ear Yomee ws” oF"Uoneste oper! a. BODIE 2015.09 101 Manage oy ener 1-002 pring" har ees or andr comacte Aste elton Cunpone milan, ‘rbunel ery aber DD peste Use pind ye ed poe ets of Dany Du peed sug UAS rte aera, eRe rete DOD AS ata ane ‘Sots ecandeeevcieseeyeome, ican ea ay (Sonm’DeD Uas sy punotenweesred bap repens os el cpt mate Teale cop. Cth boda SOL ade ‘Sirisha pues cole bb S10} ttt anomie ne ‘Sufi Ors sf Unselect nd eae tranen ‘deine crc Dad UAS elena sending DaD wD ‘mon ncligne ovongh dnc an ee cnn adele Faye ‘teeandam UN, ‘The loin den one ome ef VAS eet medi Datos Iespripatyccanaany, UA ma be med ne nan aber donee sesso.“ etre a ee het + stad edn fle ee 1 Shmused ates pene xr apis or {pgs inert tos pba ie fens edn 9D UAs te Und Satya ne ts DCA end a ee yr, aot it ea Site tte eve ‘anlar yb Seta of tee, BaD UAS yt ee for Fede. ‘Sie or oval mei eps. ral Dab US ptbowed Ine Ud Bae for ohorthan tig. ei, steal epee. Incr ra ek en tna fb Ct an ‘exaunon wih be spot optic Cot arty vl ore orien igtemrel ease DUA, core ‘pore Scie sy: supor it ponictene wor roqtty burton aortas aches Sayeed spc cay oon POROPHeHIPUSHOHEE Report No, BUPHG 20015-0972 Manayenrent Coniaren Pate Mera 13:02 Sentral Gl Onions ‘Gover in Sts whe DD LAS st ae ded Sas Nata ard 0y et epg DoD UAS wi posto a Secs Defoe Nowe Be ‘ovena ay coer DoD UAs cyst in wig te ase esis ‘Gres he eo DoD UAS ats inept eSn date pare a ele ‘Vural cout wg eer ef eee Sua eas sht cman te {estonia teed attr ned ast es aye. The ‘Gann ate et Cito Sn conten wate orient Contd ‘Cm he he a Be Maton as Daten) nd eat MN, ‘ina ety ld never te Serta ene eraig ‘Gots DAD UAB singe Sar, Pla sho ie nth oer olin gle for EAA cotton fest {gttontecnsry sigur a Di Seon of Defoe eereen Tecoma ih Faded ney Mangement Age) corded tel paling ay Sats a pS ‘hows of Bob UAS fae el cou hha comegen ag pngoyte Conan ‘Commarea Ste and DoD pls maine we ete ee. SeashaiResic tase “Thon euetlono he rgareent fc pos ye Seca ets te usaf UaS or bose we deca SAR mis iekiog (iv wnt oer cnc ye Alone Hse Coca -Cenur(APHCCY Ale Res Coouaon Cone (NERCC) re Roxen Centon Caner ORCC Fae. Sptely. eave conan ny ape be two ef DD Un enon APRCCAKRGCORCE Paci corse neon ts apenpry ed SAR ‘aia mer ate een dat UAS wa bth plac ete SAR, ‘Stn dcr pyro Goh 1 Commande U8 Nextar Cana rch th Conan, Ae Foc Neha, a cede rte enol etd + Gmmunde US. Norkern Command, cue Canane, Alasan Conan 2 + Gremondny US. Pele Comma nh of SAR Coon forth sect upalinelos ceordieaton wi to U.S. Coa Gd ach caper iene tat lt ep nligess neat (calle te egret bern a PUAD, Pec At ad ypc se pop ake, Buch commande wll Tiana ewe rer cme. aber ba wet eport Ho, DOHG-2015-097 {13 Management Commons Paley Menara 13-002 1 Ansitn Scatn of fe Fc oad Dare abl etry ‘ASoUDC wk ide ir SaReseepe athe nse evshm a DaD Deete S025 Deke Seppo the Ares” Deo Kast Tas ad che ‘heqviany yon fore UAS ag ed exes fe Da fost ‘conk eie ating rete ally ions DeDUAS ed ag ‘Sulaebes len sgn rte innate tea een econ soa SeecHed US por or eee coud rope oles ted mde DaD> ‘lai wit emt ATUAS gine eon and ‘Suman sine wb cine wa ei DaD regan an pay, ‘cating DoD Compe neler vei ge, ad eqare PUM. {sf DoD UAS wate Dnata by decedent * paar sour veppemaan arene tet ee EE evestmneigetethaetntetes Beare seats 1 Eee eA cepeccre (Ghd ear ral omen goes Ga tg ane emcees iniaeaeaitomeara eae ‘hereto eae fr prorat Serer oF Define eed by ie an bn stead oe Bers ea 33 capt eg ee {eseg eva eos epopee Milian Dement, Conta Command or NOB ‘lvl ate fin Sul). nd my beet on coy sb ont ama orpeods otc ecedcwraend jun otnce of te opeed ene ens ‘esa. and Asis No Roby DoD teu D0 egret ato be NG fn sel eae y ate Generar fernon bo pens, here ote ee eopeed ft ee DOD UAS ee Forsan Db pups for DSC\ tel al seo ee NG UAS ng dene ‘Batpovte bn spp caer ists DoD UAB cpu oe ‘Tons eat! Cuore tore Aee Dayan eyeitienttte = so eee eee epost Xo, NOHIG- 20 5.097 | 14 Management Comments Poles Somerton U2 ‘Stu offels wh nish popes we of UAS aang of mer Sine nae espe eects ote era yh Seely Defoe sed internecine ei crt Wate FRAY aN ‘hast Serr tee pol Sets rae ‘ele tt ave een rhe er re cnr ring glare By the Sct of Dla wl th ts ovr oe img at 30 ee ‘bine othe Seay of Dae oph eprensne ny Deparment, ‘eibet Coroner ND chm ot StF 3), andar ch eqs ‘heron cneyrastsber ln foal ep teed ne (een Seat festa ofthe repose ong Acseosotbell. Nao! Sine tem Ingrzto ceeds etn oxi and tating DoD UAS operon ‘italy at be ontned i pepe eng: ei roae eet ed pac wil eb eed the Depts nae popes eae ‘pvr py an usc etd Na UAS ors ae NAS ellen “Supe devlorng act and eeboby Dowie terion FURST ‘evant ingte ‘The Chlrfte Ds Foy Youd on Fel Avan TOFAY wie de Depts eflons eens reef uecean eal fens ta {rrr eto be NAS er UR. The PHA Cla wok veugan al= ‘gen URS taneins Compe to fre gly cung mc aergenents and ‘clo resene snddof atytlessCy n ae ee seet Sieg ter af be Deane od UAS apa. Dineen pome ede nae i es roca ella att OFT cheap aya ea Sepereaaetact dre es ‘Ce Det eases Una Setar of fens fr Ply sop ple tr once aecPUnS atone eect pel ere oo domes eg AS fos pono pel settee bo nen 8) Pa Aeron Sos rade Spee eas Ase Seta of afer for Home fat oa Seer “Th ASIN ender shy eon, nd conf ha USD athe ipl elt aor won clay of Dn forte domes of DoD UAS, The ‘ASD(UDAGS) wl conus conpebanive eve of hs pally ever tee end ek ‘ope pop ver red, Alpi doveant wl cet th Hepoe! No, hOUHt-7015-097 145 Management Comments Patsy Memoronton 1502, (84 Chinn oe Je chief a he DoD Gree Cant Ain Sct of ‘fete or Spel Operant inion. anf had ote appr Dab apenas. Avante the Setar Cf Pade is “he Anant the Sera Dee fa Pole As ATSDAPAY) eon for sonia lo af nae ts Mey Darter. Sa, Conn ears Monel God Bee, Se dsp ed gees doer {clea dpaeents sd aes. Tht ATSDUPA) bed sD ola ‘slic leaf pillame donc tan of DOD DAS, Adal, to promete ‘erp. th ATSD(PA) Wow we PBEA ede ASCH) devo sseugenting DED UAS one operon. “hn ude rept snd exe Duty Seay Dee evecare Calne fr he Deen eof Vana AER Ste” Setter, 206 Report No, DOMLE 2015.97 | A Appendixes Appendixes (U) DoD Offices Visited ss from Homeland (U) Under Secretary of Defense for Policy represent Defense & America’s Security Affairs, (U) Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence representatives from ‘Warfighter Support. (U) Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Oversight representatives, (U) USNORTHCOM Directors from the Operations, Plans, Intelligence, and Judge Advocate General Directorates. (U) National Geospatial Agency (NGA) representatives, (U) National Security Agency (NSA) representatives. {U) Headquarters National Guard Bureau Policy, Operations, and Intelligence Directors. (U) Headquarters U.S, Army, U.S, Navy, U.S. Marine Corps, and US. Ait Force Policy, Operations, and Intelligence Directors. (U) US. Army, US. Navy, U.S. Marine Corps,and US, Ait Force Commands responsible for Service UAS employment policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. (U) US. Army, US. Navy, U.S. Marine Corps, and US. Air Force Commands responsible for Service PED policies, tactics, techniques, and procedures. Report se, DOE 2015-007 [17 (U) Unit's Visited and Location Appendixes Ast Alc Force. “Tyndall AFB, Florida | Second Marine Arcraft Wing (2d MAW) MCAS Cherry Point, North. Carolina ‘80th isk Wing (SRW), Langley AFB, Viegnla| 27th Intelligence Squadron (2715) Langley AFB, Virginia California National Guard JFHQ Sacramento, California ‘Nr National Guard 181st Intelligence Wing “Terre Haute, Indiana ‘National Guard 174 Attack Wing_ Syracuse, New York ‘Army 35th Militar Inteligence Batalon Fort Hood, Texas 3st CAV Grey Eales Fort Hood, Texas 9 Reconnalssance Wing ‘Beale AFB, Calfornia 49 Fighter Wing Holloman AFB, New Mexico STE North Fess, Teas 2.43" vation Regiment _ ‘Fe Huachuca, Arizona, ommander Naval Air Forces INAS Coronado, Calfornia US.NORTHCOM Colorado Springs, Colorado NAVAIR Patuxent River NAS, Maryland ‘VMU2 [MCAS Cherry Polt, North Carolina (U) Use of Computer-Processed Data (U) We did not use computer-processed data to perform this evaluation. (U) Prior Coverage (U) No prior coverage has been conducted on DoD's domestic use of UAS for civil authorities during the last 5 years, Report No. OMI 2018.07 | 3 (U) Acronyms and Abbreviations cocom pecs, pIwe DoD sca 15k pum RPA secoer aS USNORTHCOM Acronyms and abbreviations Combatant Command Distributed Common Ground System Domestic Imagery Working Group Department of Defense Defense Support to Gil Authorities Intetigence, Survelance, and Reconnalssarce National Geospatial Agency National Guard Buresu Office of the Secretary of Defense Processing, Exploitation, and Dissemination Proper Use Memorandum Remotely Piloted Aircraft Secretary of Defense Unmanned Alrcraft System United States Northern Command Popa Ra, BOUNG-2045.497 19 Whistleblower Protection US. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ‘The Whistleblower Protectian Enhancement Act of 2012 requires ‘the Inspector General to designate a Whistleblower Protection Ombudsman to educate agency employees about prohibitions on retaliation, and rights and remedies against retaliation for protected disclosures. The designated ombudsman is the DoD Hottine Director: Far more information on your rights and remedies against ‘retaliation, visit www.dadigamil/programs/whistleblower. For more information about DoD IG reports or activities, please contact us: Congressional Ltalson congressional @dodig.mil; 703,604.8324 Media Contact public.affalrs@dodig,tnl; 703,604.8324 Monthly Update dodigconnect-request@listserve.com Reports Mailing List dodig_report@listserve.com ‘Twitter twittercom/DoD_1G DoD Hotline dodig.mil/hotiine Camca a iecrat att ia Bh: Perea Aeon ae ese)