Intelligence Oversight United States Marine Corps Inspector General Intelligence Oversight MR EDWIN T. VOGT Assistant Inspector General Intelligence Oversight Division

Changing Times

-- Gen George S. Patton, Jr. United States Army Inspector General “A typical IG is a man past middle age, spare, wrinkled, cold, passive, non-committal, with eyes of a codfish, polite in contact, but at the same time unresponsive, calm, and damnably composed as a concrete post or a plaster of paris cast, a human petrification with a heart of feldspar and without charm or friendly germ, minus bowels, passion, or a sense of humor. Happily, they never reproduce and all of them finally go to hell.” -- Gen George S. Patton, Jr. United States Army

Key 3 How to approach and conduct I/O Who to contact if you have questions The implications of not having good I/O can be huge (Bradley aka Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden?

WHY WE EXIST? IO MISSION ABUSES - 60s/70s ABUSES - 80/90’S VIETNAM ERA ABUSES INFILTRATION OF COLLEGE CAMPUSES INVOLVEMENT IN DOMESTIC POLITICAL ISSUES SURVEILLANCE OF ANTI-WAR PROTESTORS ABUSES - 80/90’S COMPARTMENTED PROGRAM ABUSES El Salvador “Hit Squads” Waco, TX Fort Bragg, NC IRAN-CONTRA; GUATEMALA IO MISSION 1975 – Church Committee 1981 – E.O. 12333 1982 – DODR 5240.1R SECNAVINST 3820.3E SECNAVINST 5000.34E MCO 3800.2B

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel Secretary of Defense Robert O. Work Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert O. Work ATSD (Civil Support) Inspector General (Intelligence Oversight) Counsel ASD (Legislative Affairs) (Public Affairs) Director Administration and Management USD (Policy) (Comptroller) (Personnel & Readiness) DNI Operational Test & Evaluation (Acquisition Technology and Logistics) ATSD I/O USD Intelligence ATSDIO Michael Goodroe- Acting- DNI Clapper - DODIG Mr. Jon Rymer RESPONSIBLE FOR THE OVERSIGHT OF ALL INTELLIGENCE / COUNTER INTEL ACTIVITIES IN THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

IGMC Organization Inspector General of the Marine Corps Administrative Support Division Inspections Division Assistance & Investigation Hotline Manager Senior Official Investigations Readiness Division Intelligence Oversight (GS-15) Deputy Sergeant Major Counsel to the No brief is complete without an organizational chart. The IG has 5 major divisions and a Counsel who works for SecNav but is assigned to the IGMC. Depending on the case/circumstances, IGMC reports directly to SecNav or CMC. Our overall staff is 27 people; Both the Admin Division and IGMC Counsel are worth their weight in gold. The first keeps everything coordinated, inbound correspondence (FOIA) related, assists, security management, personnel support, everything behind the scenes… they do). By virtue of what they do on the investigation side of the house, having an in-house counsel pays dividends for not only the CG but our investigators early in the investigation process. Helps shape allegations and whether we like it or not, special interest, SOI, whistleblower cases cannot be forwarded from our office without a formal thumbs up from Counsel on legal. GS-15 GS-15

Oversight Division Responsible for the Oversight of intelligence and non-intelligence “Sensitive Activities” Includes: Intelligence, counterintelligence, covered/clandestine actions, special access programs, support to law enforcement agencies, special operations, other special activities Insider Threat Program - Force Protection Information Operations – Cyber As you can see, Intel Oversight is very broad. Along with ensuring the rights of US Persons, it also includes non-intelligence activities such as RUT’s ( Realistic Urban Training), TRUE’s ( Training in Urban Environment Exercises), etc

Sensitive Activities Sensitive Activities are activities, by their very nature, that require special oversight to reduce the potential for: Physical risk to DON personnel or property Issues of unlawful/improper conduct Public embarrassment May require special protection from disclosure Sensitive Activities: If not properly executed or administered, could raise issues of: Unlawful conduct; Government ethics; Unusual danger; May require special protection from disclosure

INTELLIGENCE OVERSIGHT Getting Started with Your Units Do your homework and read the regulations. Identify subordinate Intel units and/or activities. Get your Staff Judge Advocate involved. Inspect as part of the CGIP: Training program in place Understanding of appropriate activities Knowledge of reporting requirements

GOOD IO PROGRAM COMPONENTS INSIGHT- Knowledge of programs and potential pitfalls OVERSIGHT – Review of programs for compliance with current laws and directives FORESIGHT – Determine way ahead to mitigate future problems and set path for future lawful conduct

GOOD INTELLIGENCE OVERSIGHT PROGRAM INDICATORS COMMAND AND LEADER EMPHASIS CODIFY RESPONSIBILITIES AND REQUIREMENTS FORMALLY APPOINT IO OFFICIAL (Whom Everyone Knows) TRAINING – EARLY AND OFTEN – WITH CREATIVE REINFORCEMENT

GOOD INTELLIGENCE OVERSIGHT PROGRAM INDICATORS MUST BE AN ACTIVE PART OF ALL OPERATIONAL PLANNING AND EXECUTION ACTIVE INVOLVEMENT BY SJA QUESTIONABLE ACTIVITY REPORTING Timeliness Prompt and Appropriate Corrective Action ACCURATE / CURRENT RECORDS & FILES

DoD 5240.1-R Procedures General Provisions Collection of Info on U.S. Persons Retention of Information Dissemination of Information Electronic Surveillance Concealed Monitoring Physical Searches Searches of Mail Physical Surveillance Undisclosed Participation in Organizations Contracting for Goods and Services Assistance to Law Enforcement Experimentation on Humans Employee Conduct Questionable Activities

Procedure 15 Under Procedure 15, IGs must . . . Identify, investigate, and report questionable activities. Marines should report through their Commander or IG. IGs must then report all questionable activities within five working days from discovery to IGMC-IGO Determine whether any organization, staffs, or office not specifically identified as an intelligence component are being used for foreign intelligence or counterintelligence purposes. You can reach IGMC-IGO at DSN 664-4518 or (703) 604-4518.

Questionable Activity Commonly Reported Examples Gathering information on U.S. domestic groups not connected with a foreign power or international terrorism. Producing and disseminating intelligence threat assessments containing U.S. person information without a clear explanation of the intelligence purpose for which the information was collected. Storing operations and command traffic about U.S. persons in intelligence files merely because the information was transmitted on a classified system. Collecting U.S. person information from open sources without a mission or authorization to do so. Disseminating command force protection information on U.S. person domestic activity as an intelligence product. Becoming directly involved in criminal investigative activities without proper authorization.

Significant or Highly Sensitive (S/HS) Matter Impugn the reputation or integrity of the DoD intelligence community and/or Challenge the propriety of an intel activity Prompted by Congressional inquiry May result in adverse media coverage May impact foreign relations Significant unauthorized disclosure of classified or sensitive material Report serious questionable intelligence activities and all significant or highly sensitive matters immediately.

WHY INTELLIGENCE OVERSIGHT? Relevance in the Current Environment GWOT AND TRANSFORMATION FORCE PROTECTION EVOLVING CAPABILITIES PRE-DEPLOYMENT TRAINING & COMMAND RESPONSIBILITIES INFORMATION SHARING & INTELLIGENCE FUSION OPEN SOURCE COLLECTION IO Training is normally conducted as part of pre-deployment training for Intel personnel. However, with the current OPTEMPO, I am finding this not to be the case. Fortunately, it has not been too detrimental to this date, but if it continues, it may be a problem. With regard to Force Protection, we are finding we have the “slippery slope” or mission creep in the fusion of Law Enforcement information mixed with DoD intelligence. The issue is the method of collection and by whom.

Reporting Format DTM 08-052 Assessment of effect on national security, international relations, civil liberties, and privacy rights Remedial action taken or planned Actions taken if incident involves improper handling or compromise of classified information Signed on letterhead (not an email or phone call) Recommend discussion between COCOM and Service IG’s on jurisdiction http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/DTM-08-052.pdf

Intelligence Oversight Inspection Methodology Identify your command’s intelligence components Involve your local Staff Judge Advocate Request a briefing from these intelligence components on their program to comply with MCO 3800.2B Does the unit or activity have a copy of MCO 3800.2B and appropriate SOPs on hand? Examine training records to determine if personnel are receiving training in accordance with MCO 3800.2B Quiz unit or activity members

Intelligence Oversight Inspection Methodology (continued) Review unit procedures for handling all intelligence information. Physically check the intelligence files for U.S. person information. Check the unit or activity's annual review of intelligence files. Pay particular attention to files pertaining to support given to law-enforcement activities. Determine if the unit or activity knows about Procedure 15 and how to report a questionable activity.

Command IG Responsibilities for Intelligence Oversight Inspect intelligence components and activities as part of the Commanding Generals Inspection Program (CGIP) to ensure compliance MCO 3800.2B. Report any questionable activities within five working days to IGMC-IGO in accordance with Procedure 15. Ensure that inspected personnel are familiar with the provisions of DoD 5240.1R (Procedures 1 through 4 and 14) and know how to report questionable activities in accordance with Procedure 15.

Intelligence Oversight Triangle Commanders Remain Responsible for Everything the Unit Does or Fails to Do Intelligence Professional Inspector General of the Marine Corps A system of checks and balances to mitigate risk

What We Are Seeing in DoD Trends What We Are Seeing in DoD Inspections Execution of Intelligence Activities is Generally Good Troops Get Trained—Leaders and Contractors Don’t Unimaginative Training Leads to Poor Retention Lack of Non-Intel Leader Awareness and Emphasis on IO Loss of High Demand Low Density Personnel to the Private Sector Reports of Questionable Intelligence Activity (Procedure 15) Conduct of Intelligence Activities without Appropriate Authority Personnel Misconduct in the Course of Intelligence Operations Failure to Report Questionable Activities Force Protection Dets are sometimes outside their authority in Collection vs Analysis Some of the trends we are seeing across the board in DoD

DoD IO Case Files Source Operations The Rogue Analyst The Rogue G2 The Rogue G3 who thinks they are James Bond CERP Funds for Sources Extorting money from drug cartel (Yes this was attempted) Unauthorized Collection Activities “Health and Welfare” (Wink, Wink) Subterfuge Searches Hacking into Email Accounts of US Persons Physical Surveillance and Investigations Other Employee Conduct Violations “The Instructor ‘Looked’ Like a Terrorist”

Requirements & Resolution IO Reporting Requirements & Resolution Reporting is Non-Negotiable Report All Questionable Activity Confirmed and Possible Violations Report To Intel Oversight Within 5 Working Days of Discovery MARFOR, IGMC, SJA, Command Channels or VFR Direct

INTELLIGENCE OVERSIGHT IS A GOOD THING - ENSURES PROTECTION OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS - PROTECTS USMC’S GOOD NAME - DEMONSTRATES THAT THE MARINE CORPS IS POLICING IT’S OWN INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES - PROCEDURE 15 - ALTERNATE REPORTING CHANNEL NOT A DISCIPLINARY REPORT BOTTOM LINE: ATTEND TO IO RESPONSIBILITES UP FRONT OR…. GET HELP ATTENDING TO DAMAGE CONTROL LATER

One Last Point On Reporting Questionable Intelligence Activities “In the information age, the bad news is going to get out…the only question is who will tell it first and will they tell it accurately.” - Torie Clark Former Asst. SECDEF for Public Affairs

Questions ?

Key 3 How to approach and conduct I/O Who to contact if you have questions The implications of not having good I/O can be huge

Summary/Conclusion “A free people have long had to decide where to plant the flag on that inevitable spectrum between security and liberty. We have always planted it close to liberty.” LtGen Hayden, Former Director, NSA

Assistant Inspector General Intelligence Oversight Mr. Edwin T. Vogt Assistant Inspector General Intelligence Oversight (703) 604-4518 DSN- 664-4518 Edwin.vogt@usmc.mil

Back-up slides

GOOD IO PROGRAM COMPONENTS INSIGHT OVERSIGHT FORESIGHT

ISSUES ASSIGNED TO IGMC-IO CLASSIFIED ACTIVITIES In the current environment with GWOT, violations of Intel Oversight has come to light on a few occasions. One of the biggest issues has been with the use of Interpreters who are indigenous personnel. Some have been hired by US Corporations which by the rules, puts them in the category of US Persons. We have had issues where some of these interpreters were working both sides. As you can imagine, many of these issues never make it to the open source information network. INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES

Questionable Activity Can the S-2 keep files on Marines in the battalion who are members of a suspicious group? Can the CI/HUMINT Company conduct surveillance of the local chapter of Hell’s Angels because we think that they may be a risk to our families and Soldiers? Can the S-1 collect and retain information on the spouses and children of Marines in the battalion? Can we use Low-Level Voice Intercepts (LLVI) to help local law-enforcement agencies? Can Military-Intelligence components collect information on the Ku Klux Klan? No. NCIS or the Provost Marshal has regulatory authority but not the intelligence organizations. Yes (social roster, NEO information, etc.) Maybe. Check Procedure 12 and consult your Operational Law Attorney. No -- as long as they are not agents of a foreign power. As a force-protection issue, the Provost Marshal or NCIS is better suited to collect this information.

Intelligence Oversight Presidential Charter INTELLIGENCE OVERSIGHT BOARD SECDEF QUARTERLY REPORT Department of Defense General Counsel To ensure that these orders are complied with, a structure of oversight and reporting was set up. The President’s Intelligence Oversight Board was created. Quarterly, every Service must report in the affirmative of: Our compliance regarding the requirements of the various orders and regulations Any questionable activities Any issues relating to Intelligence Oversight So if you ever wondered where your Quarterly Intelligence Oversight report went, or if any one actually read it, now you know. ATSD(IO) POLICY AND GUIDANCE COMPLIANCE INSPECTIONS