You are on page 1of 30

INTEGRI T Y * EFFICIENCY

*

ACCOUNTABILITY*

EXCELLENCE

Mission

Our mission is to provide independe nt, relevant, and timely oversight

of the Department of Defense that supports the wa1figh ter,·

promotes

accountability, integrity, and efficiency; advises the Secretmy of Defense and Congress; and informs th e public.

Vision

Our vision

is to

be a model oversight organization in th e Federal

Government by leading change, speaking truth,

and promoting

exceJ/ence - a diverse organ ization, working together as one professional team, recognized as leaders in our field.

Fraud,

Waste

&

Abuse

'tt*j~ ~*~ HOTLINE

Department of Defense

dodtg . mil/hotline

For more information about w his Lle b lowcr protection, plea s e see t he in side back cove r.

fOR OffICIAL us~ ONLY

March 20, 2015

  • (U) Our objective was to determine whe ther

DoO policies and procedures for using DoD

UAS and associated processing, exploitation, and dissemination activities comply with

applicab le Jaws, regulations,

and national

policies for providing support to domestic

civil authorities.

  • (U) DoD Is fully compliant with laws,

regulations, and nationa l policies for UAS

support to domestic civil authorities.

(U) Units operating UASs told us that, while they understand the American publl c'sl egitimate co ncerns abo u t civil libe nties and

privacy rights, they do not operate

UASs any di ffe rently from manned

platforms with sim il ar ca pabilities.

  • (U) t;lr

nda i

n ·

(FOUO) We recomm e nd that USO (P) establ ish a standardized

formal approva l proc ess for UAS support authorities.

to domesti c civil

(FOUO) We recommend that USO (P) add r ess the concerns of Military Service/ Nati ona l Guard Burea u UAS experts that policy

ambiguity is po t entially d readiness.

egrading UAS training and operat ional

(FOUO) We also recomm e nd that the USD (P) formally c harter t he Dom estic Ima gery W orking Group .

(U, Management Comments and Our

lte

011

~

  • (U) The Assistant Secret ary of Defense for Policy, Homeland Defense &

Globa l Security concurred with our recommendations. and no further

comments are required. Please see the Re commendations Table on the

next page.

Visit us at www.dodlg.mil

fOR OFflCI AL USB ONLY

tl~i

I

POR OPPICit.L USB ONL¥

Recommendations Table

M anagement

Under Secretary o f Defense for Po licy

Recommendations

.

Requiring Comment

No Additional

.

Comments Required

1,2,3

FOR OFFICIAL USH 0~1LY

FOR OFFICIP1L USE ONbY INSPEC1'01t Gf-:NEltAL DEPJ\RTM~NT OP OLWENSE 4800 M/\RK CENTER. DR I VE ALEXANORIA

FOR OFFICIP1L USE ONbY

INSPEC1'01t Gf-:NEltAL

DEPJ\RTM~NT OP OLWENSE

  • 4800 M/\RK CENTER. DRI VE

ALEXANORIA VJRGIN lA 223!;0-l!;Oll

Maren 20, 2015

MEMORANDUM FOR SECRETARY OF DEFENSE UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR POLICY

SUBJECT: (U) !!valuatio n of Do D's Use of Unmanned Air craft Systems tor SUpport to

Civil Authoriti e s (Report No. DODlG-20 15-097)

  • (U) The De puty IG, Intelligence and Spe cial Program Assessments ( ISPA) Is providing this r e port

fur your information and u s e.

(U)

We co nsi dered management comments o n a d raft of this rep ort

when preparing the final

report. Co mments from th e Office of Assistant Secr etary of Defense for Policy, Homel and

Defense & Glo bal Security w e re resp onsive fo raJI recommendati o ns.

  • (U) We appreciate the court esie s extend ed t o th e staff. Please dire ctquestions to m e al

(7 03)

699..

DSN 664 -

o~

t{703)

699..

DSN 499..

~~'"'7\rt:.!~
~~'"'7\rt:.!~

FOR OFFICIAb USE O~L¥

FOR OFFICIP1L USE ONbY INSPEC1'01t Gf-:NEltAL DEPJ\RTM~NT OP OLWENSE 4800 M/\RK CENTER. DR I VE ALEXANORIA

POR OFFICIAL USH ONLY

Contents

 

1 J

1

...

Auction

 
  • (U) Ob)ec tive

 

...............................................

1

( U)

Backgro und

..............-

...

.....................

1

(lf)

Scope and Methodology ....._

,,

2

(U

F ndit1;

 

.

DoD Is flllly Compli ant with Laws, Regulatlons, and National Policies fo r UAS Support to CMI -

Authorities ...

- 3

 

( U) Statutory Environment for Employm en t of DoD UAS in Domestic Operati ons ....................................................

3

(U)

Office of the Secretary ofDefense Unmanned Aircraft System Policy and Gui dance.-·-·-·-·-·

 

............

1

  • (U) Military Service and National Guard Bureau Implementation and Execution of DoD UAS Policy

..................

2

( U)

DoD UAS Support to

CivJI

Autho r ities Events

 

..

3

fFGYet DoD Does Not Have a Stand ardized Ap p roval Process for UAS Support to Domestic

 

Civil Authoriti es

 

....................

4

 

EFGYGt Serv ice and National Guard UAS Experts Expressed Concern that Policy Ambi guity Is

 

Potentially Degradio g UAS Training and Operational

 

-

S

  • (U) Impact of0-0D UAS Policy on Processing, Exploitation, a nd Dissemination for DSCA 6

.........................................

(U)

The Domesti c Imagery Working Group

................................................

......................................................................................

7

  • (U) Conclusion

..........--···-·-··

-

··..···--

··- ····-

..····-·-··

- -······-·-··-·-···- ········ ·-··

·.........

...............~

--··-·---·-

- ····-·-·

..

8

fFeYGt Rec om me nd atio n s, Management Comments, and Our Re s ponse

... . ....... .... ............... ........................... .......... ....

B

L

POR OFFICIAL USH ONLY Contents 1 J 1 ... Auction (U) Ob )ec tive .... ...
  • 0 - ·~······ ······~··············· ...

•••.••• ......

Assistmt Secretary of Defens e for Policy

...............................................................................................................................

........10

POR OFFICIAL USH ONLY Contents 1 J 1 ... Auction (U) Ob )ec tive .... ...

.,

.

..

. ..

..

•.•

...

...

..

•••••

...

....

...

..

...

••

......

, ••

..

.....

..

1

I

  • (U) DoD Offices Vlsited Unit's V!sited and Loca tion

( U)

.,....

_,

... _... _ ...._

........................................-

...................................................................................................17

.............................................................................................................................................................

18

(U)

Use of Compu t er-Processed Data

................-

.•

..-

.................·-··-·····-------····-..

·-· ···----·--···- ....·-·-·-·-···

lB

(U)

Prior Coverage

-

.................. ........................ ....................................

...................................................... ..... ............... ........................ ...

18

J

"'

v

y , s and Abbreviations

.........................................

J.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

R"·)1 : t ~,, ·:onlt

JU 1 S·U'n

rv

fOR OfflCb'\b U~E O~lbY

(U) Introduction

  • (U) Objective

fOR OfflCb ' \b U~E O~lbY (U) Introduction (U) Objective (U) Our objective was t o
  • (U) Our objective was t o determine whe ther Do D policies and p r ocedures for using DoD

unmanned ai r craft syste ms (UAS) and associated

processi.ng, exp loi tatio n , and

disse m ina tion (PE D) activities co mply with ap plicable laws, regu lations, and national

policies for pr ovid ing suppo rt to domestic civi l aut h o riti es.

(

i

~

,('_

rn

ti

  • (U) During the last 10 years, the quantities and types of UAS acquired by the Military

Services have increased . Their capa bili ties, 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 d ramatic pa ce. The past decade of conflict has seen the greatest

i n crease in UAS. primarily

pe r forming Intelligence.

Surveillance. and

Reconnaissance (JSR) missions.

Use o f unmanned systems in other

d omains is growing as well. Th e growth of unmanned systems

use is

expected t o con ti nue

across most domai ns. Unm anned systems have

p r oven they e nhance situationa l awareness, reduce human workload,

improve mi ssio n performance,

and

minimize

over.:1 11

risk to

both

civilian an d mllit:a,ry personnel and a ll at a reduced cost.'

  • (U) Effective u se of these unmann ed capabilities reqwres highly-trained UAS vehicle

operators, sensor and payload opera t o rs, and analysts to process, exp loit, a nd

disseminate the dala collected. The Military Seivices train all UAS personnel at var i ous

'

ooo, •unmanned Systems tntear11red ll001dm;tp FY 2013·2018"

FOR OfFICb'lb USH O~lbY

N

111

'

,.

/11

11"

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

odu~tlon

  • (U) locations around the country. The training is specifically designed to ensure tJ1at

UAS' and personnel can be operationally employed to satisfy combatant commanders ' overseas warfighting requirements.

More than ten

years of war In the combat zones of Iraq a nd Afghanistan

have taught a generation of Airman va luable lessons about the use of

Remotely Piloted Aircraft

[RPA P and other ISR assets. The

lesson yet

to be learned, how eve r, is that this battle space

experience Is not

directly applicable to operations in the U.S. As the n ation winds down these wars, and USM' RPA and !SR assets become available to support other co mbatant command (COCOMJ or U.S. agencies , the appetite to use them in the domestic enviro nm ent to collect airborne

imagery continues to grow, as does Congressional and media interest in their emp loymentJ

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY odu~tlon (U) locations around the country. The training is specifically designed to

et 1odolo v

  • (U) The evaluation was conducted in accordance with Quality Standards for lnspection

a nd Evaluation issued by the Council of the In spectors General on Integrity and

Efficiency. Those standards r equire that we plan and perform the evaluation to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonabl e basis for our findings and conclusions based on our evaluation objectives.

  • (U) Our evaJuation included a review of Federal Statutes. DoD policy and directives,

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs

of Staff Instructions. Serv ice po licy and directives, and

National Guard Bureau (NGB) policy and directives. We also co nducted interviews with personnel from across the Department responsible for policies and procedures for the

conduct of UAS operations (See the Appendix).

'

The USAF use.s the term Remotely Piloted Aircraft i nstead of UAS.

> " Protecting Sewrlty and Privacy: An Analytlcol Framework for Alrbom e Domestic Imagery;"

Colon el Daw n M .K. Zold l, USAF; USAF Law Review, Vol 70

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

1 llU~ ,

..

"

11.1 ll!

,,,

l)'•'I I .~

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

'i rwmu

OJ] Finding

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ' i rwmu OJ] Finding ~~~ iloo Is Fully Complian with laws,

~~~ iloo Is Fully Complian

with laws,

Regulations,

d National Policies for UAS Support

I
I

(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, poUcy, or intelligence oversight requirements."'

  • (U) We visited a cross-section of National Guard, U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, U.S. Marine Corps,

and U.S. Air Force operational

UAS and Intelligen ce units that have capabilities or

responsibilitie s for processing UAS collected information. These unit visits or 0 spot checks" were conducted to determine the personnel's level of understanding and compliance with DoD poli cy and Service directives for employing DoD UAS in support of civil authorities.

  • (U) Statutory Environment for Employment of

l)o

AS in Dome

ic n

era ions

  • (U) There are various controlling federaJ statues that define what the DoD is authorized

to provide to domestic civil authorities. Th ey include Title 10, Title 32, Titl e 42, and

Titl e SO. There are no federal statutes that specifically address the employment of the capability provided by a Do D UAS if requested by domestic civil authorities. Therefore,

Secti ons 37 5, 382, 2564, 9442, and Chapter 15 of title 10, United States Cod e; title 32, United States Code; Sections 300 hh, 11 and 5121, and Chapler 15A of title 42, United States Code; title so, United St.ates Code; E>recutive Order 1233 3, "United States Int elligence Activities: December 4, 1981, as amended; DoD 5240.l ·R, "P rocedures Governing the Activities of DoD ln telllgence Components That Affect United State s Persons,"

December 1982; DoD Directive 3025 . 18,

"Defense Support to Civl l Autho riti es." December 29, 2010; DEPSECDEF

Memorandum, "Interim Guidance for th e Domestlc Use of Unmanned A1rcraft-Systems.'' September 28, 2006.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ' i rwmu OJ] Finding ~~~ iloo Is Fully Complian with laws,

FOR OFFICIAL YSB O~Jb¥

nt\1 111 1

DoD and the Military Services have deve lo ped a poli cy framework for the domestic use

  • (U) of the UAS capability in accordan ce with the authorities granted for generic defen se

support. The framework also covers executive level policies that we r e dev eloped to

pr otect fully t he legal rights

of all Uni ted Sta tes persons, including freedoms , c.ivil

liberties, and privacy righ ts guaranteed by Federal taw .

  • (U) Given that the primary operational mi ssi on of the majority of DoD UAS assets is the

collection of intell ig ence, DoD UAS d omestic op erations are also s ubje c

t to Executive

Order 12333, " United States InrelHgence ActiVfties, 0 and DoD Directive 5240.1 - R, 11 Procedures Gove rning the Activiti es of DoD Jnt ell igence Comp onents That Affe ct

United States Person s, December 1982."

  • (U) Office of the Secretary of De ense Unmanned

irrr

ft

~tflrn pn r

..

y

r:a.rt Gl i

rt:a

  • (U) In addition to the Intell ige n ce Ove rsight directives , DoD UAS co n tinental U.S.

operation s

the De puty

a r e conducted under Se c r etary of De fense

a unique DoD policy d.irec t ive. On September 28 , 2006,

signed the " Interim Guidance for the Dom es tic Us e o f

Unmanned

Airc raft Systems." The purpose

wa s to ensure that DoD UAS ar e used in

accordance with U.S. law and departmental framework. Th e directive also identifies th e

appro pria te use of OoD UAS ass e ts i n d omestic operations. This guidance applies lo all

DoD UAS, used in domestic operations, whe t her operated by Active, Res erve , Nati onal Guard, or other personnel. Ji

s W hlle this rnem orand11rt1 directed the ASD Polley, Homeland Oolen.s<:, t o develo? a more a.mprehe11slve po !lc:y

document for C>omesti c l.Jse of Unmanned Aircraft Svstems." when thrs assessment began, the 2006 lnlerim guidance

remained th e guiding DoD pollcy for domestic UAS operations.

FOR OFFJCfJ\~ USE O~lL¥

FOR OFFICIAL YSB O~Jb¥ nt\1 111 1 D oD and the Military Services have deve lo

POR OFFICIAL Y5E o~arY

I

Ot

I

  • (U) The inte rim policy encourages the us e of DoD UAS to suppo rt appropriate domestic

mi ss ion sets, including ho m eland defense

(DSCA). DoD Directive 30 25. 18, "Defen se

and Defense Support of Civil Authorities Support of Civil Authorities/'

September 21. 201 2. is the guiding DSCA policy document for th e DoD.

"DSCA is s upp ort pro vided by U.S. federal military forces, DoD civilians,

DoD

cont ract p erso nnel. DOD Compone nt assets, qll d, in coo rdlnati on

wilh

the Governors, fede rally fund ed National Guard forces in r espon se

to

r equests

for

assistance

fr om

civil

authoriti es

for

domestic

eme rgencies, law

enforcement support and othe r domestic activities ,

o r from qualifying entitles for 'special events.' 0 "

  • (U) The interim poli cy

is h ighly restrictive on ac tual authorization. It s pecifically

forb id s the u se ofDoD UAS for OSCA opera tion s, incl udi ng sup port to Fed eral, State,

local , and triba l government organizations, unless exp ressly appro ved b y the Secretary

of Defense (SECDEP), or design a te . Interviews with Ass ista nt Secretary

of Defe nse for

Ho m eland Defense and America's Sec urity Affairs personne l indicate tha t, to date, the

SECDEF has not delegated this approval authority.

  • (U) Miiitary Service

nd

. ational Guard Bure~ u

In, plemPnta Ion

.r1 w:

~c' t*"'

'l

n

UA<; P<"lirv

  • (U) Our intervi ews with Military Service and NGB personnel rev eal ed that they opera te

UAS of various capa biliti es and confi gurat'i ons and approach the employment ofUAS

fo r DSCA differently, primarily because of Service cu ltu re and overall UAS operation al experien ce.

  • (U) We reviewed all Service DSCA directiv es and foun d th at while e4ch Service h as

overarching doctrine, policy, or instructions for impl e menting OSD directiv es for DSCA;

thei r imp leme n tation of OSD p olicy on UAS use for DSCA varies greatly. For example, U.S. Army FM 3-28, "Civil Support Operations, Appendix H. UAS in Civil Support,"

August 2010, s rates that "

...all

requests for UAS must be approved by the Secretary of

  • (U) Defense." On th e other hand, U.S. Air Po ree . Air Comba t Command Instruction

6

Defense

Defense

Suppor t of Civil Aulhorltl es (OSCA), rnt eragency Partner Guide, APrll 2013, Offi ce of the Asslstanl Secretary of

(Homelimd Defense & Americas' Security Affairs. )

FOR OFFICIAL USE O~lLY

11•11011 l~t• llOll

ll

i. \I

11

1

/

I

I

FOR: 0FPIGb6d:; USE onLY

10-810. "O pera tions Involving D0mestic Imagery Support Request Procedu res for

U.S.

.Missions.'' December 20 13 , stqtes that"

...u

se of intelligence , surv eillance, and

re connai ssance, opel'ations r econnaissance; and remote ly pi loted air c raft,

particularly

for DSCA missions operating collection sys tem s outside of DoD-controlled ai rspace

wilhih the U.S. may 1 require Secretary of Defense approval." Th e U.S. Navy an d the U.S.

Marine Corps do n ot currently have specific directives or in stru ction s for UAS u se for

DSC.A The NGB OSCA directives for UAS employment is a reflection of their Service

affiliation, i.e.; Air National Guard units comply with U.S. Air Force l nsLructions and Army National Guan.I u n its comp l y with U,S. Army UAS directives.

t f' D

0 UAS Supoort

ivil 4uth

ri

ie

f

Q'1tS

(FOU O) We bega n our evaluation by requesting from each of the Military Services and

th e NGB all example s of instances where a DoD UAS had bee n em p loyed in support of

civil authorities in th e con t i n enta l U.S.

or U.S. T erritories from Sep tember 28,2006, to

th e present. These d a tes were chosen to coincide with the release of the cun-ent

interim guidance for UAS s upp ort to domestic civil authorities. We reques te d that for

each insta nce the a u tho r ity,

following data shoul d b e p r ovided: date o f request, req ue sti ng

summ~ry of

request. approval process with documen tarlon, summary o f

event, and any lesson s

learned if applicable. We also asked for

denied requests.

(FOUO) This data call resulted in. a relatively short collated list of less than twenty

events that could ~e catego rized as Do D UAS support to domestic civil authorities. T he list consisted of both approved and disapproved requests . We the n interviewed both Service and NGB He ad qua r ters personnel who process ed these requests up through the Service approval pr ocess lo OSD. During ou r unit visits we a lso discussed these events

with the unit co mmanders to unders tan d how they viewed the a pproval process. as well

as how the int eri m guidance p olicy impacted the actual support reques t

  • 1 Ef11phasls added ,

F0R OFFlCh6IL USE OMLY

•:'ii''

11

111\111

1

1

I

-ll /'l'I

FOR OFFICIAL USH ONlrY

(FOUO) Service and NGB He adquarters representatives told us that each of the DoD UAS

support r eq u ests was pro cessed differ en tly . A numb e r of the approval requests were

processed through normal Do D training event channels that are managed by the joint staff. A few were processed thro u gh Service channels working with OSD. And we heard

t hat some were handled directly between t he OSD staff, SECDEF, and civil authorities

te lephonica lly. We were unable to unco ver any formal docum e ntation procedures that defined the end-to -end a pprova l process. We were to ld that this ad ho c process

contri buted t o amdety among the Service an d NGB unit commanders abo ut when they

had the auth ority to employ their UAS resources as requested.

_

..........._

Pr('('e

I oD Does Not Have a Standardized Approval

...

+ r UAS SUfl!"l

rt

o D'1)rne tir r1

· 1 Aut

orities.

(FOUO) While the current OSD inte r im guidance for DoD UAS Support to Civil

Authorities prov ides guidance on UAS employment and when to request SECOEF

approval, it does not provide a me chani sm for how to process that reques t. ­

-GB (b )(l)(E )

~OHO)

i! L•pon N11. !HJ1JIC /.() l '\ UY/

I

~

FOR OFFICIAL USE OP.lLY

FOR OFFICIAL YSB OHbY

.,_, __.......... ,
.,_,
__..........
,

5ervice and

ational Guard LIAS EKperts

Expressed Concern that Policy Ambiguity Is Potent ally

Oppr r1·,,~ AS Tr~•.,i a~., nrpnat·o

I ~'-"'tdiraac:C\

(FOUO) Multiple units told us th a t as forces using UAS capabilities continue to draw

down oversea s, opportun i ties for UAS re alistic trainihg an d use have decreased. UAS unit commanders explained. that provid ing UAS s upport to civU authorities could yield

more realis ti c training opportun iti es and increase oper ational readiness. However,

mul tip le comma nd ers also stated tha t as a res ul t of the restrictive approval processes

for domestic UAS use, policy confu sion, and internal Service hes ita training op po rtunities are missed .

tion s, potential

(FOUO) USAF r e pre se ntatives told us that the OSO po licy makes it difficult to determine

what train ing is acceptable for DSCA UAS missions. For examp le , a unit submitted a request to use a remotely piloted aircraft (MQ-1 Predator and/or MQ· 9 Re aper) to

support incid e n t a wareness and assessment during fi re season training with the

Departm ent of Energy. The unit was Informed that although the training m e t the qualifications exp r essed in the Air Combat Command Domestic lmag eryT r ain jn g

Prop e r Us e Memorandum (PUM) / 1 the activity was cl assifie d as

DSCA, since this was

support for wild fires to an outside agency and, therefore, r equired SECDEF approval. Since th e request was for incident awa ren ess:and assessme nt during the entire

fire sea.'Son, the unit chose not to pursu e blanket approval beca u s e of what t hey felt was

an onerous approval process.

(FOUO) Another examp le was provid e d by the Army and Ai r National Guard. In this case, a DSCA exe r cise was proposed to 1'GB (bX7J(E)

FOR OFFICIAL YSB OHbY .,_, __.......... , 5ervice and ational Guard LIAS EKperts Expressed Concern that
  • 4 Proper U se M emorandumt a memora11dum signed at111ually by an o rgan lratf011 1 s cerHfylng gove m ment official that defipes the organ izations domest tc imagery req U1reme1m and intended 11se. It also contains a proper use siatement acknowledging awareness of the lega l and

policy restrictions reg ardi ng domestic Imagery, Afl 1A·l04, 23 Apr 2012

FOR OFFICIAL USB O~lLV

FOR OFFICIAL YSB OHbY .,_, __.......... , 5ervice and ational Guard LIAS EKperts Expressed Concern that

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

. GB (b)(7)(E)

(FOUO) We were also told about a DSCA tra ining ex ercise with the Depa rtment of

Energy using a U.S. Air Force remotely piloted ai r craft that wa s conducted without

fo rmal SECDE F approval. T his exe r cise was for incident awareness and assessment

s upp ort of a simulated h aza rd ous m aterial releas e o n Departmen t of Energy property.

T he tra inin g met all of the internal Service guidelines and wa s forwarded for approval. However, since the exe r cise w as con ducted within OoD restricted airspace, the Joint

Staff determined that a p proval was no t require d . Ou r int e rviewe e s explaine d th at thi s

left them confused about just w h e n the OSD s upport for D SCA applied.

policy requiring SECDE F approval ofUAS

(F OlJO) Finally , a U.S. Marine Corp UA S

unit told us that once each month their wing

hosts a community leadership program where local po litician s are invited to view and

learn about the capabilities of the various aircraft on base . During one such event, a

local mayor requested UAS

suppor t to look fo r p otholes in the a r ea. While the uni t

conc eded that this type of operation cou ld provide realistic training fo r th eir p ilots and

sensor opera tors , local co mm anders de termin e d t h a t und e r t h e inte

rim gui da nce,

requesting SEC DE F ap p roval to co ndu c t a UAS mission of this type did not make operat ional sense.

(U) Impact of DoD UAS Policy on Processing,

E><ploi at ion, and Dissemioatio

for o_ CA

(FOUO) Along

w ith i n te rvi ew i ng various un its op erat in g UASs. we al s o intervi ewed

orga n izations responsible for perform ing the PED of UAS collected data. We met with

National Geospatial Intelli gence Age n cy (NGA) person nel

responsi ble for ensuring that

NGA and other De fense In telligence Com p onents comply with the domesti c collection of

tactical imagery consfatent with DoD 5.240.1-R. While NGA does no t

ope r ate UASs th ey

do provide PED s u pport to DoD DSCA and othe r Federal age n cy UAS o perat ions withi n

t h e United States.

. GA (b)(>)

50 USC

§ 3142

. 'GA (b J( 3)

50 l' SC

§ 314~

POR OFP!Gh'\L U~B OP>lLY

FOR OFF1Glt\b HSE Otlb¥

GA (bl(i )

50 t; SC

§ 1U~

(FOUO) U.S. Air Force units operating UASs rely on the Air Forc e Distributed Common Ground System (DCGS) for their PED support. We visited the 480 1 '' Intelligence,

Surveillance, and Reconna iss ance Wing

and two subordina t e DCGS elem ents to capture

their proc esses for DSCA UAS PED

s upp ort.

The Wing executes any DSU\ supp o rt

rrUssion ac cord ing to tasking from USNORTHCOM. USN ORTH COM Contingency

Plan 3501, DSCA. serves as the COCOM's plan for DoD responses to civil requests for

s upport, incl u ding JSR asset support. The 48ou1Wing has no formal policy for DSCA

s upport. but

does comply with Air Combat Command

In struction 10 -810, "Operations

Involving Domestic Imagery Support Request Procedures," for US Missions as well as U.S. Air Force and DoD In telligence Oversight directives.

(FOUO) Th e U.S. Navy and U.S. Mari ne Corps curren tly have no UAS-specific policies for

dome s tic UAS PED,

(FOUO) The O.S. Army also does not have UAS·specific policies for domestic UAS PED.

Howeve r , because current USA pol1cy prohibits UAS civil su pport outside of DoO managed airspace, they feel that compliance with a ll applicable intelligence oversi~ht

regulations is sufficient lo meet OSD policy guidance.

,I 1JJ The D

  • (U) During our evaluation

we also observed how t he Service s and NGB are working

together to address some of the challenges associa ted with the current OSO poli cy on

the

DoD domes~ic UAS use for DSCA.

We discovered that an informal body, known as

the Domest ic Imagery Working Group (DfWG), was attempting to address some of the

concerns rais ed by the UAS units. The DIWG is a cross-functional and multi-service

FOR OFFICIAL USE OHbY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

1r:q,

0

informal working group consisting oflawyers, o perators, intelligence profes s ion a ls, 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 h e lp determine the approval authorities required to conduct the collection of domestic imagery by all airborne ISR collection assets, including UAS. Ov er time the DIWG narrowed its focus to add ress DoD UAS support to civil authorities an d informa ll y captures lessons learned and best practices th at are shared among the Services and NBG. The DIWG has produced a number of recommendations on UAS empl oyme nt processes and legal guides to help the Servi ces ensure policy compliance. Presently, the DIWG is champ ioned by USAF representatives. but each of the Servi ces and

NGB par t icipate. The DIWG is

a

b est practice that s hould be leveraged to assist the

policy and Service communities in addressing the unique challenges o f operating UAS in

the U.S.

(

) Cond

·o,,

(F'OUO) We concluded that DoD takes the iss ue of DoD UAS s upport t.o domestic ci vil

autho riti es very seriously. Great care

is taken by DoD personnel to protect the

American public's civil liberties and privacy rights while simultaneously preparing to employ UAS capabilities as required by National Command Authorities. Our review of UAS policy implementation across the department, coup led with our unit visits to

discuss actual events, did not reveal evidence that any DoD entity has employed a UAS conducted PED in s upport of domestic civil authorities contrary to laws , regulations ,

or

or national policies. It should be noted that th e units operating UASs across the

department told us that, while they un<lerstand the American public's legitimate concerns about civil liberties and privacy rights, they do not operate UASs any differently from manned platforms with similar capabilities.

---c-,-- ec,ommendations, Management Commen s~ and Our Response

(FOU O) Recommendation 1

{-FGOO) We re c ommend that USO (P) establish a standardized formal ap pro val process for UAS support to domestic civil authorities.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

r<.ii p urt No. llOIHCi·2~

t

11

ll9/ I H

FOR OFFIGl~AL USE O~ILY

'in dmv

FOR OFFIGl~AL USE O~ILY ' in dmv (FOUO) ASD (P) concurred with the recommendation and stated

(FOUO) ASD (P) concurred with the recommendation and stated that Deputy Secretary ofDefense Policy

Memorand um

15 - 002, ~Guidance for the D omestic Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems", February 17, 2015 ,

addresses this issue. They also stated they will continue to work with the Military Services and Nationa l

Guard Bureau to address any

uncertainty In the approva l process.

ra

I

( U) Comments from t he ASD (P) a r e responsive to our recommendation. The Deputy Secretary of Defense Policy Memorandum 15-002, which is an update to the 2006 Hrnterlm Guidance for the Domestic Use of Unmann ed Aircraft Systems", provides the necessary clarity to the Milita.ry Services and National Guard Bureau on the approva l process for UAS support to domestic civil authorlties .

(F-OUO} Recommendation 2

fFGOO) We recommend that USD (P) ad dress the concerns o f Military Service/National Guard Bureau UAS experts that policy ambiguity is potentially degrading UAS rraining an d operational readiness.

FOR OFFIGl~AL USE O~ILY ' in dmv (FOUO) ASD (P) concurred with the recommendation and stated
FOR OFFIGl~AL USE O~ILY ' in dmv (FOUO) ASD (P) concurred with the recommendation and stated

(FOUO) ASD (J>) concurred with the recommendation and stated that Deputy Secretary of Defense Policy Memorandum 15-002, uCuldance for the Do mestic Use ofUnmanned Aircraft Systems", February 17, 2015, addresses this lssue.

JI f1 (U) Com men ts from the ASD
JI
f1
(U)
Com men ts from the ASD

(P) are responsive to our

recommendatio n . Tl1e Deputy Sec retary of Defense

Policy Memorandum 15 -002, has addressed the majority of the Milltary Services and Nation al Guard Bureau's concerns about policy ambiguity impacting UAS training and operational readiness.

(F-OUOJ Recommendation 3

fFGOO) We als o recommend that the (DIWG.)

USO (P) formally chart er the Domestic Irnagery Workin g Group

FOR OFFIGl~AL USE O~ILY ' in dmv (FOUO) ASD (P) concurred with the recommendation and stated
FOR OFFIGl~AL USE O~ILY ' in dmv (FOUO) ASD (P) concurred with the recommendation and stated

(FOUO) ASD (P) concurred m prmc1ple

to fo rm al ly chartering the DIWG. Th ey will work with

the OIWG

lead Service to develop the appropriate working group leadership construct to champion DoO UAS initiatives.

n ,..

FOR OFFIGl~AL USE O~ILY ' in dmv (FOUO) ASD (P) concurred with the recommendation and stated
  • (U) Comments from tile ASD (P) are resp onsi ve

to our

recommendation. T he DIWG was a "best practice"

identified during our evaluation.

fOR OFFICIAL USE O~JLY

FOR OFFIGl~AL USE O~ILY ' in dmv (FOUO) ASD (P) concurred with the recommendation and stated

FOR OFFICIAL USE ON Lt

FOR OFFICIAL USE ON Lt (U) Management Comments Assistant Secretary of Defense for Policy ..,,, ,

(U) Management Comments

Assistant Secretary of Defense for Policy

..,,, , tlilt'J in tliae tcc:Ol!UlV'lldations arc l'C't'Oll\ll)Cnw1hons l and 2. "'" hrlie' °'""....., aldru'Cd io
..,,, , tlilt'J in tliae tcc:Ol!UlV'lldations arc l'C't'Oll\ll)Cnw1hons l and 2. "'" hrlie' °'""....., aldru'Cd io
..,,,
,
tlilt'J in tliae tcc:Ol!UlV'lldations arc
l'C't'Oll\ll)Cnw1hons l and 2. "'" hrlie'
°'"".....,
aldru'Cd io lhc Fe i!rwr) 17 2\11~. llq>tll~ .,
l\1lic~ \l mlOJ'llld'Jl.D
,Clao
rn,e ;.i
COi\. .
Uic
.._
,
J
J(~
..cnt- · \Ve rill ""'• fn.-:1\1
("11;ud&nci:f0f1hc Dl:"f'T'CWilr:~n 1,r~;>Jt11t ml(j "\.m.rw , ,,
""8
~ilb11.e Mi.lil.l!Y II~ •lid N1t io1111I c , ' !I • u t ' ..
1) Ul\tt'!Uin1" in lhe
NlflWAI
id<
..
,
I,;~ Al'MI
·
~
!>l•BJI Cl : l."al~ of DoD's Usrof lJ" llU. «l Al'Nl S \$.cms for S1:1"111J1 C'iYl1
\Wlorillb!PTqcd 'Ja. 02 0 14-0f:-llOr.0071
f hlnJ.: )OU i« Ille CJWf•llllnit) "' 1<\,
}"ur < • .Ji:Mion ot OoD's i
(l!)(J)
-o'
....
..
ror JOl'l"l<t Ill a
-- -
COOC\n \>hb
l.e ~-
...S)
orl!I,,
l l'
..,.,,.
s.
11
l
..
..

~e:ll.

~R crntdinJl •ecommcnJ;111c>n J . the 1.1\:r;irtr"' nt con< 1111 1n 1v11w 1pk II) f"11!l.111'

..

,

'er> 1e< 10 ik-'Ci"!> tl

....

-

~Ille .,·mk1

' ""!' 1

..

--

,'111p

'""""m ict to d wr l'ion Doi> UA i

hinrr

I.be Don-tic

lmaR..1'"

Work.i.111 1 1M1p (l ll\h11

11/r"' II " •rk ..

lb the DI °" l.I lrad

initintlvt5.

~lfwc ""bcoft19furth:T...,;-..C.-·

point 1Jfcordacl for this m:tller, Ind can