evaluation of dod's use of unmanned aircraft systems (uas) for support to civil authorities

8/19/2019 Evaluation of DoD's Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) for Support to Civil Authorities

1/30


2/30

ission

Our

mission

is to

provide independe

nt

relevant and timely oversight

o

the Department

o

Defense that supports the wa1figh ter · promotes

accountability integrity and efficiency; advises the Secretmy o

Defense and Congress; and informs the

public.

Vision

Our vision

is

to

be a model oversight organization

in

the 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

ourfield.

Fraud

Waste

buse

~

~

~

H O T L I N

Department

of Defense

dodtg . mi l ho t l i ne

For more information

about

whis eblowcr protection, please see the inside back cove

r.

fOR OffICIAL u ~

ONLY

INTEGRI TY * EFFICIENCY * ACCOUNTABILITY EXCELLENCE


3/30

March 20, 2 15

U) Our objective was to determine

whether

DoO policies

and

procedures for

using

DoD

UAS and

associated processing, exploitation,

and dissemination

activities comply with

applicable 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

th e

y understand the

American publlc s l

egitimate

co

ncerns abo

ut civil libenties

and

privacy rights, they do not operate

UASs any

di

fferently from manned

platforms with sim

il

ar capabilities.

t ; l r

n

U)

nda

i

·

• (FOUO) We

recomm

e

nd

that

USO

(P)

establ

ish a

standardized

formal

approva

l

process

for

UAS

support to

domesti

c

civil

authorities.

• (FOUO)

We recommend thatUSO

(P)

add

r

ess

the

concerns of

Military Service/Nati

on a

l Guard Bureau UAS experts that

policy

ambiguity is po tentially degrading UAS training

and

operational

readiness.

• FOUO) We also recommend that the USD (P) formally charter

the Domestic Imagery Working Group.

U, Management Comments and Our

lt 011

(U) The Assistant Secret

ary

of Defense for Policy, Homeland Defense

Global Security concurred with

our

recommendations. nd no further

comments are required. Please see the Recommendations Table

on

the

next page.

t l ~ I

Visit u

t

www.dodlg.mil

fOR OFflCIAL

USB

ONLY


4/30

POR

OPPICit.L

USB ONL¥

ecommendations

Table

Management

Recommendations

Requiring Comment

No

dditional

Comments

Required

Under Secretary of Defense

for

licy

1 2 3

FOR OFFICI L

USH

~ 1 L Y


5/30

FOR

OFFICIP1LUSE

ONbY

FOR

OFFICIAb

USE O ~ ¥

INSPEC1 01t Gf-:NEltAL

E P J \ R T M ~ N T OP OLWENSE

4800 M/\RK

CENTER. DR

I

VE

ALEXANORIA VJRGIN

lA

223!;0-l!;Oll

Maren 20, 2015

MEMORANDUM FOR SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

UNDER

SECRETARY

OF DEFENSE FOR

POLICY

SUB

JECT: (U) valuation of

Do

D's Use of Unmanned Air cra

ft Sy

stems t r SUpport

to

Civil

Authorities Report

No. DODlG

-20 15-097)

(U)

The Deputy IG, Intelligence and Special Program Assessments (ISPA) Is providing

this

re

port

fur

your

information

and

us

e.

(U) We considered management comments on a draftof this reportwhen preparing the final

report. Co

mments

from

th

e Office

of

Assistant Secretary

of

Defense for Policy, Homel

an

d

Defense Global Security we

re

responsive

fo

raJI recommendations.

(U) We appreciate the co

ur t

esies extended to the staff. Please di re

ctqu

estions to me

al

(703) 699

DSN

664-

t { 7 0 3 ) 699

DSN

499

~ ~ ' " ' 7 \ r t : .


6/30

L

POR OFFICI L USH ONLY

R"·)1 : t ·:onlt

U

1S·U'n

v

FOR OFFICI L USE ONLY

Contents

J

1

Auction

(U) Ob)ec

tive..-

.........

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

....

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

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

.

..

....

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

..

...........

.

..........

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

........

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

..

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

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

1

(U) B

ackgro

und . 1

(lf)

Scope

and

Methodology ....

_,,____,.......,

____

.,

.......

- .

.......

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

___..................

....................................................... _ 2

(U F ndit1; .

DoD

Is flllly

o

mpli

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 Operations ..................

....

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

..

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

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

3

(U)

Office

of

the

Secretary ofDefense Unmanned Aircraft System P

olicy

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

ardiz

ed

Ap

p

roval

Process for UAS

Support to Domestic

Civil

Author

ities 4

GYGt

Service and National Guard

UAS

Experts Expressed Concern that Policy Ambiguity Is

Potentially

Degradio

g

UAS Training and

Operational

Readiness

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

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

- ... S

(U)

Im

pact of0-0D

UAS

Policy on Processing, Exploitation, a nd Dissemination for DSCA 6

(U) The Domestic Imagery Working Group ................................................. ...........

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

.

...

.

...

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

....

........

.......... - ··..

···--

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

7

(U) Conclusion 8

fFeYGt Recom

me

nd

atio

ns, Management Comments, and Our Response .... .................. ................................................ B

0

-

· · · · · · ·

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ...•••.•••......

Assistmt

Se

cretary of Defense for Policy....................................

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

........

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

..

......

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

....

10

1 I

.,

... ...•..••.•... ... ..•••••... .......•..•...•......••

,

••..•.....•..•

(U) DoD

Offices

Vlsited .,

....

_,

...

_

...

_...._

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

....

.

...........

....-

...

..

..

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

....

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

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

.......17

(

U)

Unit's

V!sited

and Location .................. ............... ............

... ......

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

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

18

(U)

Use

of Computer-Processed Data ...............- .•..- ................. ·

-··- · · · · ·-------·· · ·-

..·-· ··· ....·-·-·-·-··· lB

(U)

Prior

C

overage

...... .

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

..

......

........

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

......

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

-

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

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

...........

..........

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

...18

J '

v

y

s and Abbreviations......................................... J.


7/30

fOR Offl b

\b

~ ~ l b Y

111 ' . /11 11

FOR OfFICb lb USH ~ l b Y

U) Introduction

U) Objective

(U) Our objective was to determine whether DoD policies and procedures for using DoD

unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) and associated processi.

ng,

exp

loi

tation,and

dissemina tion

(PE

D) activities comply with applicable laws, regulations, and national

policies for providing suppo

rt

to domestic civil authoriti

es

.

i

~

,( _

rn

•

t

U) During

the

last 1 years, the quantities and types

of

UAS acquired

by

the Military

Services have increased. Their capabili 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 pace. The

past decade

of conflict has seen the greatest

increase in UAS. primarily performing Intelligence. Surveillance. and

Reconnaissance (JSR) missions. Use of unmanned systems in

other

d

omains

is growing as well. The growth of unmanned systems use

is

expected to conti

nue ac

ross most domains. Unm

anned

systems have

proven

they

enhance situationa l awareness, reduce human workload,

improve mission performance, and minimize over.:1 risk to both

civilian and mllit:a,rypersonnel and all

at

a

reduced

cost.'

(U)

Effective use

of these

unmanned capabilities reqwres

highly-trained UAS vehicle

operators,

sensor

and payload operators, and analysts

to

process, exploit, and

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

var

ious

' ooo •unmanned Systems

tntear red

ll001dm;tp

Y 2013·2018


8/30

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

o u ~ t l o n

1 l l ~ ,.. 11.1

ll

,,, l) • I

I

FOR

OFFICIAL

USE

ONLY

(U) locations around the country.

The

training is specifically designed to ensure tJ1at

UAS'

and personnel can be operationally employed to satisfy combatant commanders

overseaswarfighting requirements.

More than ten years of war In the combat zones of Iraq and Afghanistan

have taught a generation

of

Airman valuable lessons about the use of

Remotely Piloted Aircraft

[RPA

P and

other ISR

assets. The lesson

yet

to be learned, however,

is

that this battle space experience

Is

not

directly applicable to operations in the U.

S.

As the nation 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 environment to collect airborne

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

their empl

oymentJ

t

odolo

(U)

The evaluation was conducted in accordance with Quality

Standards

for

lnspection

and Evaluation is sued

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

reasonab

le 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 ofStaff In

structions

. 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 USAF use s the term Remotely Piloted Aircraft instead o UAS.

> ProtectingSewrlty andPrivacy: An Analytlcol Framework or Alrbome Domestic Imagery;

Colon el Dawn M.K. Zold l, US

AF

; US

AF Law Review

, Vol 70


9/30


'irwmu


O ] Finding

l o o Is Fully Complian with laws

Regulations d National Policies for UAS Support

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

operationa

l

UAS

and Intelligence units

that have

capabilities

or

responsibilities 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

policy and Service directives for employing

DoD

UAS

in

support of

civil authorities.

(U) Statutory Environment for Employment o

l o S 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 authori ties. Th ey include Title 10, Title 32, Title 42, and

Title

SO.

There are no federal statutes

that

specifically address the employment of the

c p bility

provided by a DoD UAS i requested by domestic civil authorit ies. Therefore,

• Sections 375, 382,2564, 9442, andChapter15 ofti

tl

e10, UnitedStates Cod e; title

32,

UnitedStatesCode;

Sections 300hh,11 and5121, nd Chapler15A oftitle42 ,UnitedStates

Code;

titleso, United

St

.atesCode;

E>recutive

Order

12333,

"United

States

IntelligenceActivities: December4,

1981, as

amended;DoD 5240

l ·R,

"P roceduresGoverningtheActivitiesof DoD lntelllgenceComponentsThatAffectUnited StatesPersons,"

December1982; DoD Directive3025.18, "DefenseSupportto CivllAutho

rit

ies."December29, 2010; DEPSECDEF

Memorandum,

In t

erimGuidancefortheDomestlcUse of UnmannedA1rcraft-Systems.''September 8, 2006.


10/30

FOR OFFICI L YSB O ~ b ¥

nt\1

1

FOR

O F F J f J \ ~ USE

O ~ l L ¥

DoD and the Military Services have develo ped

a

policy framework for

the

domestic use

(U)

of

the UAS capabi lity in accordance with

the

authorities granted for

generic

defense

support. The framework also covers executive level policies that were developed to

prot ect fully the

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 mission of the majority of DoD U

AS

assets is the

collection of

intelligence, DoD U

AS domestic op

er

ations

are also s

ubje

ct

to Executive

Order 12333 United States InrelHgence ActiVfties,

0

and DoD

Dir

ective 5240.1-R

Procedures

Gov

erning

the

Activities

of

DoD

Jnte

ll

igence

Com

ponents That

Affe

ct

United

States

Persons D

ecember

1982.

U) Office of

th

Secretary

of

De ense Unmanned

irrr t ~ t f l r n pn r y r:a rt l i rt a

(U) In addition to the Intelligen

ce

Ov

ersight directives, DoD

UAS

continental U.S.

operations are conducted under a unique DoD policy

d.irec

tive.

On

September 28 , 2006,

the Deputy

Secretary of

Defense signed

the

Interim Guidance for

the

Dom

estic Use of

Unmanned Aircraft Systems. The purpose was to ensure that DoD UAS are used in

accordance with US. law and departmental framework.

Th

e directive also identifies the

appropria te use of

OoD

UAS assets in domestic operations. This guidance applies o all

DoD

UAS

used in domestic operations, whether operated by Active Reserve, National

Guard, or otherpersonnel. i

s Whlle this

rnemorand11rt1

di rected the ASD Polley, omeland Oolen.s


11/30

POR

OFFICIAL

Y5E

o ~ a r Y

I

It

11•11011

llOll ll i

\I

11

FOR OFFICIAL USE O ~ l Y

(U)

Theinterimpolicyencourages

the

useofDoD

UA

S

to

suppo rtappropriate

domestic

missionsets,

includinghom

eland

defense

and

DefenseSupport

of

Civil

Authorities

(DSCA). DoD Directive3025.18,"Defen seSupportof Civil Authorities/'

September21.2012.istheguidingDSCA policydocumentforth eDoD.

"DSCA

issupp

ort

provided

by

U.S. federal militaryforces,DoD civilians,

DoD cont ract personnel.DOD

Component

assets, qlld,

in coo

rdlnation

wilhtheGovernors,federally

fund

edNational

Guard

forces

in

response

to

r

equests

for

assistance fr

om

civil authorities for domestic

emergencies, lawenforcementsupportand otherdomestic activities,

orfromqualifyingentitlesfor 'specialevents.'

0

"

(U) Theinterimpolicy is highly restrictiveonactual authorization. Itspecifically

forb idstheuseofDoDUAS forOSCA operations,includingsupport toFederal,State,

local,

and triba

l

government organizations,unless

expressly

appro

v

ed

bytheSecretary

ofDefense(SECDEP),

or

designate. InterviewswithAss istant Secretary

of

Defensefor

Homeland Defense andAmerica s SecurityAffairs personnel

indicate

that,todate,the

SECDEF has

not

delegatedthisapprovalauthority.

U) Miiitary

Service

nd

.ational Guard

B u r e ~

u

In,plemPnta Ion r1 w: ~ c t* '

l

n

UA<

P< lirv

(U) Our interviewswithMilitaryServiceandNGB personnelrevealedthattheyoperate

UAS

of

various capabilities

and configurat'ions

and

approach

theemployment

ofUAS

fo rDSCA differently,primarilybecauseof Service

cu

ltu reandoverallUAS

operationalexperience.

(U) Wereviewed allService

DSCA

directivesandfoundthat whilee4chServicehas

overarchingdoctrine,policy,or instructionsforimplementing

OSD

directives for

DSCA

;

their

implementationof

OSD

policyon

UAS

usefor

DSCA

variesgreatly. Forexample,

U.S. ArmyFM 3-28,

"Civi

lSupportOperations,AppendixH.UAS in

Civil

Support,"

August 2010,sratesthat"

..

all requestsforUAS mustbeapproved

by

theSecretaryof

(U) Defense."On theotherhand,U.S.

ir

Poree.Air CombatCommandInstruction

6

Defense Suppo

rt of

Civil

Aulhorltles

OS

CA), rnteragency

Partner Guide, APrll

2013, Office of the Asslstanl

Secretary of

Defense (Homelimd Defense Americas'Security Affairs.)

1

/ I I


12/30

FOR: FPIGb6d

;

USE LY

•: ii \

1

I -ll / l I

F0R OFFlCh6IL USE OMLY

10-810.

O

perations

Involving D0mestic I

magery

Support

Request

Procedu

res

for

U.S

. .Missions.

December 20

13 , stqtes

that

...u se of intelligence, surveillance, and

recon

nai

ssance, opel ations reconnaissance; and remotely piloted aircraft, particularly

for DSCA

missions operating

collection sy stems

outside

of DoD-controlled ai rspace

wilhih the

U.S.

may

require Secretary

of

Defense approval. The U.S. Navy and the

U.S.

Marine Corps

do

not

current

ly have specific directives

or

in

st

ru c

tion

s for

UAS

u

se

for

DSC.A

The

NGB

OSCA directives for

UAS employment is a

reflection

of their

Service

affiliation, i e ;

ir

National Guard units comply

with

U S ir Force lnsLructions and

Army National Guan.I un its

comp

ly with

U,S.

Army

UAS

directives.

t

•

D 0 UAS

Supoort

ivil

uth

r ie f

Q 1tS

(FOUO)

We

began our evaluation by requesting from each of

the

Military Services

and

th

e NGB all

example

s ofinstances where a DoD UAS

had

been

em

ployed in support

of

civil

authorities

in

th

e contin

enta

l

U.S

. or U.S. Territories from September 28,2006, to

th

e

present. These

da tes were

chosen

to coincide with the release of

the

cun-ent

interim

guidance

for UAS support to domestic civil authorities. We reques ted that for

each insta nce

the

following data should be provided: date of request, re q

ue

st ing

authority, s u m m ~ r y

of

request.

approval

process

with documen

t

ar

lon,

summary

of

event,

and

any lessons 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

categorized as DoD UAS support to

domestic

civil

authorities.

The

list

c

onsisted

of both

approved and disapproved requests

.

We the

n

interviewed

both

Service

and NGB

Head

qu a

r

ters

personnel who

process

ed

these requests up th rough the

Service

approval

pr

ocess

lo OSD. During ou r unit visits

w

also

discussed

these events

with

the unit commanders

to

understand how they viewed the a

pproval

process. as well

as

how the in ter im

guidance policy impacted

the

actual

support reques

t

Ef11phasls added,

1


13/30

FOR OFFICIAL USH

ONlrY

i

Lpon . HJ1JIC /. ) l \

UY/ I

FOR OFFICIAL USE OP lLY

(FOUO)

Service and NGB He

adquarter

s representatives told us that each

of

the DoD UAS

support r

eq

u

ests was pr ocessed

differ

en

tly. A

numb

er 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

t

he OSD

staff, 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

contri

buted

to

amdety among

the

Service

an

d

NGB unit

commanders abo

ut

when they

had

the auth

ority

to employ

their UAS

resources as requested.

_ ..........._ I

oD Does Not Have Standardized Approval

Pr( ( e r

UAS

SUfl "l rt o D'1)rne

t r r1

· 1Aut orities.

(FOUO)

While

the

current OSD interim guidance for

DoD

UAS

Support

to Civil

uthorities prov

ides

guidance on

UAS employment and

when to request SECOEF

approval, it does not provide a mechanism for how to process that request.

~ O H O

-GB b

) l)

E )


14/30

_ __

FOR OFFICIAL YSB OHbY

FOR

OFFICIAL USB O ~ l L V

5ervice and ational Guard LIAS

EKperts

Expressed Concern that

Policy

mbiguity

Is

Potent ally

Oppr r 1 · ~

AS T r ~ • . i

a ~ . nrpnat·o ~ ' - ' t d i r a a c : C \

(FOUO) Multiple

units told us that s forces using UAS capabilities continue to draw

own

oversea

s,

opportun

ities for

UAS re

alistic

trainihg an

d

use

have decreased. UAS

unit

commanders

explained. that

provid

i

ng UAS

s

upport

to civU

authorities co

uld yield

more realisti

c

training opportun

iti

es and increase operational readiness. However,

mul

tiple

comma

nd

ers also state

d

tha

t

as

a

res

ult

of

the

restrictive approval

processes

for domestic

UAS

use, policy confusion, and internal Service hes

ita

tion

s,

potential

training op

po

rtunities are missed.

FOUO) USAF represe

ntatives

told us that the OSO po

licy

makes it

difficult

to

determine

what training is acceptable for

DSCA

UAS missions. For example, a unit

submitted

a

request to

use

a remotely piloted aircraft (MQ-1 Predator and/or MQ·9 Reaper) to

support incident a

wareness and

assessment during

fi

re season training

with

the

Department of Energy. The unit was Informed

that

although the training met the

qualifications expressed

in

the Air Combat Command Domestic lmageryTrainjng

Prop

er

Us

e

Memorandum

PUM)/

1

the

activity

was

cl

assified

as

DSCA,

since this

was

support

for wild fires to an outside agency and, therefore, required SECDEF

approval.

Since the request was for incident awareness:and assessment

during

the entire

fire

sea. Son,

the unit chose

not

to

pur

su

e blanketapproval because

of

what t

hey

felt was

an

onerous approval process.

(FOUO) Another example was provided by theArmy and Air National Guard. In this

case, a DSCA exercise was

proposed

to

1 GB bX7J E)

ProperUse Memorandumt a memora11dum signed

at111ually

by an organlratf011

1

s cerHfylng govem

ment

official tha tdefipes

the organizations domest tc

imagery

reqU1rem

m and intended

1

1se. t also contains a proper use siatement

acknowledging awareness

of the lega land policy res

trictions

regarding domestic Imagery, Afl A ·l04, 23 Apr 2012

4


15/30

FOR

OFFICIAL

USE ONLY

POR

OFP!Gh'\L

~

OP lLY

.

GB

b) 7) E)

FOUO) We were also told

about

a DSCA tr a ining exercise with the Depa

rtment

of

Energy

using

a U.S. Air Force remotely piloted ai rcraft

that wa

s

conducted without

fo rmal SECDEF approval. This exercise was for incident

awareness

and

assessment

sup port

of

a

simulated

hazard

ous

material release on Departmen t

of Energy

property.

The tr ainin g met all

of

the internal Service guidelines and was forwarded for approval.

However,

since

the

exercise was conducted

within

OoD

restricted

airspace,

the

Joint

Staff

determined that ap

proval

was no t required.

Ou

r

in t

erviewees

explaine

d th

at

th is

left them confused abo

ut

just when the

OSD

policy requiring SECDEF approval ofUAS

s

upport

for DSCAapplied.

FOlJO) Finally, a U.S. Marine C

orp

UAS unit told us that once each month their

wing

hosts a community leadership program where local politicians 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

area. While the

uni

t

conceded

that this

type of operation cou

ld

provide realistic training for th

eir

pilots and

sensor opera tors, local comm

anders

determined that under the

int

e rim guidance,

requesting SECDEF approval to co

ndu

ct a UAS mission of this type did

not

make

operational sense.

U) mpact of DoD UAS Policy on Processing,

E> ploi

at on, and

Dissemioatio

for o CA

FOUO) Along with in terview ing various units operating UASs. we

al

so intervi

ew

ed

organizations responsible for perform ing the PED of

UAS

collected data. Wemet wit

National G

eospat

ial Intelligence Agency (NGA)

per

sonnel responsible for ensuring

that

NGA

and other Defense In telligence Components comply wit

the

domestic collection

of

tactical imagery consfatent with

DoD

5.240.1-R. While NGA does

no

t

ope

rate UASs they

do

provide PED support to DoD DSCA

and

other Federal age ncy

UAS

ope rations

with

in

. GA b) >) 50

USC

§ 3142

the United Stat

es

.

. GA

bJ(

3) 50 SC §


16/30

FOR

OFF Glt\b HSE

Otlb¥

FOR

OFFICIAL USE

OHbY

GA (bl(i) 50 t SC

(FOUO)

U.S

. Air Force units operating UASs

rely

on

the

Air

Force Distributed

Common

Ground Sy

st

em (DCGS) for their

PED

support. We visited the 480

1

Intelligence,

Surveillance,and Reconnaissance

Wing and

two subordinate

DCGS

elements to capture

their processes

for DSCA U S PED support. The Wing executes

any

DSU\

supp

o

rt

rrUssion accord ing to tasking from

USNORT

HCOM. USNORTHCOM Contingency

Plan 3501, DSCA. serves as the COCOM s plan for DoDresponses to civil requests for

support, including J

SR

asset support. The 48ou1Wing has no formal policy 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

U.S. Air Force

and

DoD Intelligence

Oversightdirectives.

(FOUO)

Th

e U

S. Navy

and

U.S

.

Mar

i

ne

Corps curren

tly

have

no UAS-

specific policies for

dome

stic

UAS

PED ,

(FOUO)

The

O.S

.Army also does not have

UAS·specific

policies for domestic

UAS PED.

However,

because

current USA pol1cy prohibits UAS civil support outside of DoO

managed airspace,

they

feel that compliance with all

applicable

intelligence

s i ~ t

regulations is sufficient lo

meet

OSD policy

guidance.

JThe

(U) During

our

evaluation

we

lso

observed

how

t

he

Services

and

NGB

are

working

together

to

address some of the challenges associated with the current OSO poli

cy

on

the

DoD

d o m e s ~ i

UAS use for DSCA. We discovered thatan

informal

body, known as

the

Domest ic Imagery Working Group (DfWG),

was attempting

to address

some of

the

concerns

raised by the

UAS

units. The DIWG

is

a cross-functional and

multi-service


17/30


1r:q,

r i

i pu t No l l O I H i ll9 IH

FOR OFFICIAL

USE

ONLY

informal working group consisting oflawyers, operators, intelligence professionals, 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 airborne ISR

collection assets, including UAS.

Ov

er time the

DIWG

narrowed

its

focus to

add

ress

DoD UAS

support to civil authorities and informa

ll

y

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 guides to help the Services

ensure

policy compliance. Presently, the

DIWG is

champ

ioned by USAF representatives. but each of the Services and

NGB

pa rticipate. 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

U.S

.

( ) ond

·o

(F OUO) We concluded

that

DoD takes the issue

of

DoD UAS support

t.o

domestic civil

authorities very seriously. Great

care

is taken

by

DoDpersonnel 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, 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,

or

national policies. It should be noted that

th

e units operating UASs across the

department told

us

that, while they un


18/30

FOR

O F F I G l ~ L USE

O ~ I L Y

indmv

fOR OFFICI L

USE

O ~ J L Y

(FOUO) ASD

(P) concurred

with

the recommendation and stated

that

Deputy Secretary ofDefense Policy

M

emorand

um 15

-002,

G u i d a n c e for

the

Domestic U

se

of Unmanned Aircraft Systems , February

17, 2015,

addresses

this

issue. They also stated they will continue

to work

with

the

Military Services

and

Natio

na

l

Guard Bureau to address any uncertainty In the approval process.

ra

(

U)

Comments from the ASD

(P)

are 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 Sy

stems ,

provides

the

necessary clarity

to the Milita.ry

Services and National Guard

Bureau on

the

approval process for

UA

S

support to

domestic

civil

authorlties.

F-OUO} Recommendation

fFGOO) We

recommend

that USD (P) ad

dress

the

concerns

of Military Service/National Guard

Bureau

UAS

experts

that policy

ambiguity

s potentially

degrading

UAS rraining

an

d

operational

readiness.

FOUO)

ASD

(J>) concurred with the recommendationand 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.

J

f

(U)

Com ments

from

the ASD (P) are

responsive to

our

recommendation.

Tl1e

Deputy Secr

etary

of

Defense

Policy Memorandum 15-002, has addressed

the

majority

of

the Milltary Servicesand National Guard

Bureau's concerns about policy ambiguity impacting UAS training and operational readiness.

F-OUOJ

Recommendation 3

fFGOO)

We als

o

recommend that the

USO (P) formally

char

t

er

the Domestic Irnagery W

orkin

g

Group

(DIWG.)

(FOUO)

ASD (P) concurred m prmc1ple to

fo

rmal

ly

chartering

the DIWG

. They will

work

with

the OIWG

lead Service to develop the

appropriate

working group leadership construct to champion

DoO

UAS

initiatives.

,..

(U) Comments from tile

ASD

(P)

ar

e

resp

onsi

ve

to

our re

commendation. T

he DIWG was

a

best

practice

identified during

our

evaluation.


19/30

·

!>l•BJI Cl : . a l ~ ofDoD 'sU

srof

lJ"llU. «l Al'NlS\$.cms for S1:1"111J1 C'iYl1

\Wlorillb PTqcd

'Ja.

02014-0f:-llOr.0071 (l!)(J)

f

hlnJ.: )OU « lle

CJWf

•llllnit)" '

1 t l l

.,.._,Clao

J

°'""

.....,

l \ 1 l i c \ lm

lOJ'llld'Jl.D

J ~

( 1 1 ; u d & n c i : f 0 f 1 h c D l : f ' T ' C W i l r :

~ n

, r ~ ; > J t 1 1 t

m l j

\

.m.rw , ,,..cn

t-

·

\Ve

rill

'•

fn.-:1\1 8

~ i l b 11.e

M .lil.l!Y I I ~ •lid N1t io1111I ,..,' I •u

t '

..id<

1) Ul\t

t'!Uin1"

in

lhe NlflWAI

~ e : l l .

t d i n J l •ecommcnJ;11c>n J.the 1.1\:r;irtr"' nt con

tl....

~ I l l e

. ,

mk1

'

"" '

1..--...,

11

1p

'""""mict

to

d

wr

l'ion

Doi>UA

initintlvt5.

~ l f w c

b c o f t 1 9 f u r t h : T

. . . , ; - . . C .

ilm ·m. . ,

poi

nt 1Jf

cordacl fo

rthism:tller,

Ind

can bt

rcsched at • •

or

fS71)

6 \ D

FOR OFFICIAL USE ON t

Rr:pon

No

llOfJl(;-20


20/30

F8R:

8 fPl6k\:fs YSE 8Nl5Y

f Q ~

QFFISIAb 5 1 3

8Uls1/

DEPUTY HCltE'TAlll'YOf OEFEHIE

It ta OUlJlaj H JrTAO Otl

lllA&Hl#i1ro11

••••·111

l'«imw ' 7 , 2 0 1

MllM

l)

RA

Nl)tJMFOR SUCR£TAlll

f.

S OFTH

t

MI LITARY

DEPAJlTM

l'

NTS

CHAIR.MAN

UF TIU:

JOlllfT Cll OF STAfT

l ll\ll)J { .

l:Rff fARYOF OEl'ENS

t:

J'OR

i \ C Q ~ I T I O l l

T

C

('HNOI

OOY

,

1 ~ · 1 1 c

UNDER

SE('Rl

:T

AR

YOF O

El'ENSL FOR POU


21/30

~ r l l l i ~ ' ) .

; , c t t . c ~ r a 1 « 1

by

or unnncl

L:J1l- ~ n u l ~

by

law and llflt""ved the · ' ~ ~ ol

< r . . .

· ~ · DclD "'"'' "''

l ,c;

f(lf dcm('e, oil UA5

..-qui>llk"1 coJ

l

ec;tl('i> M i o l l -

and

clmemlnstion

of bifnnNllln

dunnr dc:mc lle

DoD IJAS

em

r

lll}'Tnrnt

will

l it

in

\\ llh

DnJ\11&

DoD

and DoD

.COmpooctll 1 1 1 e l l i ~ r n c c ovmlglit guidlnce and wi11

ni q

11ir( roordiNtinn 11.od = ~

of

1 ptO IC'

iusc:

mQl11t•r•11dum

(l'UM).

2 ,>0 O rv

1.tm1n

In 3rrrop 1 • n U/\S

m11

y bo t&SCd in Ii®

,.,.·

r m n n ~ nl...,nl\ forclom

e-.ic

mu1rons.

A W ' f ' l ' l l l t

c•ruirntlMC :S 'l 3'

1nclud.- ~

• «Ull'hltncd - n c h q n ~ 1fttH1

~

la

tho

.:vent of

1

reque•I for

!UllflOl't.

lhD Cluirmlll of

h4'

Joint ('hie&

or

lltalf, in

OOOllultlllion

with Ibo

appropri..icgco8fl PliiG Combiia>o ll Cam 1noncic:rs, will p r o v i d ~ a

recommend111ionto of O\lfc:nsc conccmiRA 1hc

usoofOoDUAS.

To

seek 1111provol

ior other mistions,

DoD

Components

should

we

die 1pprovlll 'uthoriticg,

proccdul'es.

and

O n ~ auch u CJCS

fnstrucllCMI

;71

oom. "DoD

CounlA:rdrus

suwon."

Supportwill

be rirovided

on 11

re

lmbtinable

ba$lt

unless

olbcnvlse

rcqllired by

law, or

Oil

11

non-n:lmbumble bull if ruch

support is

both

el.llhorUul by

la w

mcl "PJIC'Ovcd by ~ of

o,f


22/30

Poli t' ,lf< mr>rand.11111

J) - 1 / 0

C " o 0 v

in 1:131Q. Where OoD UAS are licld..d ..,

tlll:

Stui:'aNatl• •nlll tlt..ml n1oy

not ttTIOlay DoD

UAS

with0111 1

he

eppmcl < f

tlt

c l'

1r

,,1 D::Ji:nsc; lmw

em

. ~ . c

r.nvm1NJ

may

< C l U l l

DoP t•Ali

l t l ) 1 M 1 1 t

1'l 1flclr pl '

(

~

Chlct of

1.l

etl(meJ lJ\l

tri

nu rn11 IN

OO)

, nd rbc a r r r a r n ~ t

:..ii

lit.tn

iX'l'llW'•nt

1 1 r y

will

P"l V

...i,

c c • r . n " 1

~ i o o

1n

~ ~ C J

" " •

0 .

f"'1> l'

r 'l'll

the us.e " OoO rn "tll'f""f 0 1" S!Jl.e ' < J U ~ I

PIAn

f11eur en

the

proted•".:$ 111111 lilre mi11INCI AA CQ'l\1tlmdoo (or -

to tho •1tte"'V'l

'

airspa«1e Ind to l)Ollin t r)' of 1urJ>nriuttlon. In C(IMCC'.lt with

b 1 n c i

~

MGIU)l tmtnl .oorJinliled 'q;Kit11.l J;lanning. All) Stlte thll f'l'Ol n

tbc w;e,cr Doo UAS In

iu

l l 1 1 l ~

•l>oukl '' '

'

With cu""""fl"'ndtns i;cosraphlc Cnmt.x.11

C'o

mn

w>D plam . l l l < n i 7 ~ ·

U11h

Yo ' effo tt and e!fldm.·'

The mly p t i o o to the cquir'CJiJent for :lJlflt111..1by Secrei.11v or

f o r ~

use of

OoD t

AS for

dome.

.

Ir. o

ll

UAS

on

1111 i\f R

CCJ

AKRl'l"JJRC'C. l'x illc C.X>rd1Ml'Od tn6'.i04 with a J1rore.-ly ilSIJ

P6 R 6FPl6IAL MSl3 8PH:N


23/30

Iht \•

Jl' 11111

c r t l M ' \

of

flcfeo

•r for

I u c l

0trr 111

.-1111d Ci1nNll c o r h

IASO(llt)clC"'tll 'ill

nKI"

1hir ~ « v 1 i • 1 1 I n

1 1 0 ..,..,(Jnft of0

1111d

poll.,y,

h i d i DoD (.'omfl'ltlt'U: n ~ U i : c n c e E• .d lK . 'Ind t P L ~ •

1

• Ptior > t l r 1

to

tl.ernun•l>oD

purp •

•" farP!ie

\

. r a i 1111d \

I Ul'V"'l

t dvll aummtln

,Tbls

l l ' C I ~ Oo

OVAS

opcnlld

byfon:a i o

Title10 lilJl UJ 111d Naifon1I G\lard pcoonnelInTill' l l orS1otoActlvaD111y

siaw

.

' ~ 0 1 M S . • . . _ , - . i o I C S 1 : n J S O l , J o w - ~ S ) o M o O - ~ , . , . , . ~ 0 . .

P A l l l • ~ I J o U )

~ > ~

. . . ~ - - 1 1 1 - » ~

l

l i . - l lWO

~ 7 ~ U . . - ( ' R M

N i l l O w ) o , . . t l i w , . C l « J o \ ~ , , , _ - ~

Jtt.s

-s..b - h t - l l li l lC - . fM_ . . . . , , l t i

OilriDUAl, t . . . 91119 . . . . . . . 8

JCAI. -

. .

..,. ....

1

• t ' . oMIA

_

..

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

¥QR QfFl€Ii4:h

HSE 8Nrit'

F6ft 6fiFJEIAL MSE 8NLY


24/30

::iwc omcl

al1

"bo

wish

10 proro$C Ille u

se>

01

Do

O

UAS In suppou

r

m•i

< < SQ\c

diWt'1.,. '"" ' """"'i'

"'

(or

tr

aini

111:

rrqumn

-t'f'll'l'ltl tho

5c:cicl4 ') 1 t Ur l\:n:se) lhoutd

11K.1or

in lllC

f'll'l',.cd ur

r:- and

time rcq

uin:d

CD co

n

111lt wit

h

die FAA

for

accc::ta IO

tht'

' " ' " '

alrt puce lllld.to

"

"'"'

"

~ « r c l l l r nf Ucf

1 ' ' ' 0 \ Sllllcs In Wnlch DoD UAS D'ICll 111'1

r..1«t' s

df'OIU

toadmc r< ror lhcelhninai

n t

cf llf'l W'C"'-11:'

a < ~ ~ rcsui.,1ons

11 1


25/30

the

Cl aih1llll1

nf

lhc

J

oin

t Chlcls

of


26/30

FOR

OFFICIAL USE

ONLY

\ 1J(1rJ

i',l(I

J) J I

(

. Jl .

'i -

l ' i

FOR OFFICIAL USE ~ 1 L Y

Appendixes

U) DoO Offices Visited

• (U) Under Secretary

of

DefenseforPolicyrepresentatives fromHomeland

Defen

se &

America'sSecurityAffairs.

• (U) Under Secretary

of

Defe

nse

forIntelligence

representatives from

VVarfighterSupport.

• (U)Assistant to theSecretaryof DefenseforIntelligence

Oversightrepresentatives.

• (U)

USNORTHCOM

Directorsfromthe Operations,Plans,Intelligence,

and

JudgeAdvocateGeneralDirectorates.

• (U)NationalGeospatialAgency(NGA) representatives.

• (U) NationalSec

urity

Agency(NSA)

representatives.

• (U)Headquarters NationalGuard Bureau

PoLicy,

Operations,and

IntelligenceDirectors.

• (U)

Headquarter

sU.S. Army,U

.S.

Navy,U.S. MarineCorps,and U.S. AirForce

Policy,Operations,and IntelligenceDirectors.

• (U)U.S. Army,U.S. Navy,

U.S

.MarineCorps,

and U.S.

AirForce

Commands

responsibleforServiceUAS employment policies,tactics,techniques,

and procedures.

• (U)U.S. Army,

U.S.

Navy,U.S .MarineCorps,

and U.S.

AirForce

Commands

res

ponsible

forServicePED policies,tactics,techniques,

and

procedures.


27/30

FOROFFICIAb W E

ONeY

Anpe

d 1 x c

FOR OFFICIAL USE

ONLY

) Unit s Visited and locatio

1st Air

Force Tyndall

AFB

, Florida

Second

Marine Aircraft Wing (2d MAW)

MCAS Cherry

Po

lnt, North Carolina

480th

JSR

Wing

{ISRW) Langley

AFB,

Virginia

27th Intelligence Squadron 27 IS Langley

AFB,

Virginia

California Nationa l Guard

JFHQ

Sacramento, California

A

ir

National Guard 181st ntelllgence

Wing

Terre Haute, Indiana

Air

National Guard

174 Attack

W ing Syracuse,

New

York

Army 15th Military

Intelligence Battalion Fort Hood, Texas

1st CAV

- Grey Eagles Fort Hood, Texas

9 '

Reconnaissance

Wing

Beale

AFB,

California

4

9th

Fighter Wing

Holloman

AFB,

New

Mexico

JTF-North

Ft

Bliss, Texas

2-13th

Aviation

Regiment

Ft

Huachuca, Arizona

Commander Naval

Air

Forces

NAS

Coronado, California

U.

S. NORTH

COM Colorado Springs, Colorado

NAVAIR Patuxent R

Tve

r

NAS, Maryland

VMU

-2 MCAS Cherry P

oint,

N

orth

Carolina

U

U f Computer Prore

~ e r i

ta

(U) We did not use computer-l)rocessed d t to perform

this

evaluation.

U Prior Coverarie

U)

No

prior

coverage has been conducted on DoD s domestic

use of

UAS for civil

authorities during the last 5 years.


28/30

FOR OFFICI L USE O ~ L Y

FOR

OFFICI L USE

O ~ L Y

U) Acronyms and Abbreviations

COCOM

Combatant Command

DCGS Distributed Common Ground System

IWG

Domestic Imagery Working Group

DoD

Departmentof Defense

DSC

Defense Support

to

Civil Authorities

ISR Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance

NG

National Geospatial Agency

NGB

National Guard Bureau

OSD

Office of the Secretary

of

Defense

PED Processing, Exploita tion, and Disseminati

on

PUM

Proper se Memorandum

RP

Remotely Piloted Aircraft

SECDEF Secretary

of

Defense

U S Unmanned

Aircraft

System

lJSNORTHCOM

United States

Northem

Command


29/30

FOR OFFICIAL USH OMLY

FOR OFFICIAL USH ONLY

Whistleblower Prote tion

U S

DEP

AR

TM

E

NT

OF D EFENSE

Tiie

Whi \lle/Jlower

Protection

Hnhunct/me11l Acl o{ 2 12 n•quires

the lnspettor General to

des1 g

natr a Wl st/eb/n111er Prolec.tio11

Ombudsman to educate a9ency cmp/oyf es

abo

t

pml>ibitions

on retaliation. and rights

and

rem.:dics t1gairtst rete1/Jation for

pro tected dmlos res. The dc5i qnated ambuclsma is the Do[ Jlotline

Director For more in/ormCt tion on your r ights

and

re

me-die5 ugamst

retaliat

io

n.

1i


30/30

evaluation of dod's use of unmanned aircraft systems (uas) for support to civil authorities

Documents