US Congressional Oversight of Intelligence (2011-12)

7/28/2019 US Congressional Oversight of Intelligence (2011-12)

1/36

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON :

1

29010

SENATE" !113TH CONGRESS1st Session

REPORT

2013

1137

R E P O R T

OF THE

SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE

UNITED STATES SENATE

COVERING THE PERIOD

JANUARY 5, 2011

TO

JANUARY 3, 2013

MARCH 22, 2013.Ordered to be printed

VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:44 Mar 27, 2013 Jkt 029010 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4012 Sfmt 4012 E:\HR\OC\SR007.XXX SR007


2/36

(II)

SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California, ChairmanSAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia, Vice Chairman

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West VirginiaRON WYDEN, OregonBARBARA A. MIKULSKI, MarylandMARK UDALL, ColoradoMARK WARNER, VirginiaMARTIN HEINRICH, New MexicoANGUS KING, Maine

RICHARD BURR, North CarolinaJAMES RISCH, IdahoDANIEL COATS, IndianaMARCO RUBIO, FloridaSUSAN COLLINS, MaineTOM COBURN, Oklahoma

HARRY REID, Nevada, Ex Officio MemberMITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky, Ex Officio Member

CARL LEVIN, Michigan, Ex Officio MemberJAMES INHOFE, Oklahoma, Ex Officio Member

DAVID GRANNIS, Staff DirectorMARTHA SCOTT POINDEXTER, Minority Staff Director

KATHLEEN P. MCGHEE, Chief Clerk

During the period covered by this report, the composition of the Select Committee on Intel-ligence was as follows:

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California, ChairmanSAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia, Vice Chairman

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West VirginiaRON WYDEN, OregonBARBARA A. MIKULSKI, MarylandBILL NELSON, FloridaKENT CONRAD, North DakotaMARK UDALL, ColoradoMARK WARNER, Virginia

OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, MaineRICHARD BURR, North CarolinaJAMES RISCH, IdahoDANIEL COATS, IndianaROY BLUNT, MissouriMARCO RUBIO, Florida

HARRY REID, Nevada, Ex Officio MemberMITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky, Ex Officio Member

CARL LEVIN, Michigan, Ex Officio MemberJOHN MCCAIN, Arizona, Ex Officio Member

DAVID GRANNIS, Staff DirectorMARTHA SCOTT POINDEXTER, Minority Staff Director

KATHLEEN P. MCGHEE, Chief Clerk



3/36

(III)

PREFACE

The Select Committee on Intelligence submits to the Senate thisreport on its activities from January 5, 2011, to January 3, 2013.This report also includes references to activities underway at theconclusion of the 112th Congress that the Committee expects tocontinue into the future.

Under the provisions of Senate Resolution 400 of the 94th Con-gress, the Committee is charged with the responsibility of carryingout oversight of the programs and activities of the IntelligenceCommunity of the United States. Due to the need to protectsources and methods used by the Intelligence Community to pro-tect our nations security, most of the Committees oversight workis conducted in secret and cannot be discussed publicly. Neverthe-less, the Select Committee on Intelligence has submitted activitiesreports on a biennial basis since 1977 in order to provide as muchinformation as possible to the American public about its intel-ligence oversight activities. We submit this report to the Senate incontinuation of that practice.

We also thank all of the members of the Committee in the 112thCongress. In particular, we would like to thank five Senators whoplayed important roles in the oversight of the Intelligence Commu-nity who have completed their service with the Committee. SenatorSnowe served on the Committee beginning in the 108th Congressin 2003 and completed her service on the Committee during the112th Congress when she retired from the U.S. Senate. SenatorConrad served on the Committee during the 112th Congress after

which he also retired from the Senate. Senator Nelson served onthe Committee starting with the 110th Congress in 2007 throughthe 112th Congress. Senator Blunt served on the Committee duringthe 112th Congress. Senator McCain served as an ex officio mem-ber of the Committee while he was Ranking Member of the Senate

Armed Services Committee during the 110th, 111th, and 112thCongresses. Their unique insights and perspectives contributedgreatly to the Committees oversight work and their strong supportfor the Intelligence Community has helped protect our nations se-curity. For that, we are grateful.

We also thank all the Committees staff during the 112th Con-gress whose diligence and professionalism have enabled the Com-mittee to fulfill its vital legislative and oversight responsibilities.

DIANNE FEINSTEIN,Chairman.

SAXBYCHAMBLISS,Vice Chairman.



4/36



5/36

(V)

C O N T E N T S

Page

Preface ...................................................................................................................... IIII. Introduction .................................................................................................... 1

II. Legislation ...................................................................................................... 2A. Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 .............. ............... 2B. Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 ............................. 3C. Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 ............................. 4D. Reauthorization of Title VII of FISA ...................................................... 5E. Senate Resolution (S. Res. 86) Recognizing the Defense Intelligence

Agency on its 50th Anniversary ............. ................ ............... ................ . 6F. Other Legislation ...................................................................................... 6

III. Oversight Activities ....................................................................................... 7A. Hearings ............... ............... ................ ............... ............... ................ ........ 7

1. Worldwide Threat ............................................................................. 72. Afghanistan/Pakistan ....................................................................... 83. Iran .................................................................................................... 94. Iraq .................................................................................................... 95. Unauthorized Disclosure of Classified Information to the Media

(Leaks) ............................................................................................ 106. CIA Operation that Killed Usama bin Ladin ................................. 107. Oversight of Intelligence Community Counterterrorism Efforts .. 108. Cybersecurity .................................................................................... 119. Covert action ..................................................................................... 11

10. Counterproliferation ......................................................................... 1211. Implementation of FISA Authorities .............................................. 12

B. Inquiries and Reviews ............................................................................. 131. Study of the CIAs Detention and Interrogation Program ............ 132. Committee Review of Intelligence Issues Related to the Septem-

ber 11, 2012, Terrorist Attacks in Benghazi, Libya ...................... 14C. Intelligence Community Issues ............................................................... 15

1. Response to Unauthorized Disclosures of Classified Information 152. Information Sharing ......................................................................... 153. Strategic Plan ................................................................................... 164. Role of the Intelligence Community in the United States Export

Control Regime ................................................................................. 165. Core Contractors .............................................................................. 176. Comptroller General Access to Intelligence Community Informa-

tion ..................................................................................................... 177. Cyber Analysis .................................................................................. 188. Analysis on North Korea ................................................................. 189. Intelligence Advance Research Projects Activity ........................... 18

10. Intelligence Community Information Technology Enterprise ....... 1911. Space Launch .................................................................................... 1912. Defense Clandestine Service and Defense Intelligence Agency

Vision 2020 .............. ................ ............... ................ ............... ........... 1913. Analysis ............................................................................................. 2014. Committee Review of Arab Spring Analysis and Production ....... 20

15. Foreign Language Capabilities ....................................................... 2016. Education and Training ................................................................... 2117. Counterintelligence .......................................................................... 2118. Accounting Standards and Auditability ......................................... 2119. Improper Payments .......................................................................... 22



6/36

Page

VI

D. Audits ........................................................................................................ 221. Insider Threat Detection Capabilities .............................................. 222. Unifying Intelligence Strategies ........................................................ 223. Department of Homeland Securitys Office of Intelligence and

Analysis ............... ............... ................ ............... ................ ............... ... 234. Intelligence Community Data Centers ............................................. 235. Compensation of Federally Funded Research and Development

Center Executives .............................................................................. 23E. Technical Advisory Group Reports ......................................................... 23

1. Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity ........................... 232. China ................................................................................................... 24

IV. Nominations ................................................................................................... 24A. Stephanie OSullivan, Principal Deputy Director of National Intel-

ligence ....................................................................................................... 24B. Lisa Monaco, Assistant Attorney General, National Security Divi-

sion ........................................................................................................... 25C. David H. Petraeus, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency ......... 26D. Matthew Olsen, Director of the National Counterterrorism Center ... 26E. Irvin Charles McCullough, III, Inspector General for the Intelligence

Community ............................................................................................... 27V. Support to the Senate ................ ............... ................ ............... ............... ....... 28

VI. Appendix .............. ............... ................ ............... ................ ............... .............. 28A. Summary of Committee Actions .............. ............... ................ ............... . 28

1. Number of meetings ........................................................................... 282. Bills and resolutions originated by the Committee ......................... 283. Bills referred to the Committee ........................................................ 294. Committee publications ..................................................................... 29

VII. Additional Views .............. ............... ................ ............... ................ ............... . 301. Additional Views of Senators Ron Wyden and Mark Udall ............ 30



7/36

113TH CONGRESS REPORT

" !SENATE1st Session 1137

COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES

MARCH 22, 2013.Ordered to be printed

Mrs. FEINSTEIN, from the Select Committee on Intelligence,submitted the following

R E P O R T

I. INTRODUCTION

The activities of the Committee during the 112th Congressranged from passage of necessary legislation on intelligence mat-ters to the continuation of many oversight activities and effortsbegun during the 111th Congress.

As summarized in part II of this report, the Committees legisla-tive accomplishments in the 112th Congress included the enact-ment of the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011, the

Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, and the Intel-ligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013. The Committee hasnow helped to enact four consecutive intelligence authorization billsafter a lapse in the enactment of intelligence authorization bills forfiscal years 2006 through 2009. The Committee also helped enactan extension of Title VII of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance

Act (FISA) to preserve the important intelligence collection authori-ties that are vital to the protection of our national security.

A major focus of the Committees oversight agenda is the reviewof existing intelligence programs and proposed legislation to ensurethat U.S. person privacy rights and civil liberties are not com-promised during the collection of intelligence information. However,most of the Committees oversight activities and efforts are, of ne-cessity, done in secret in order to protect sources and methods vitalto our nations security. During the course of the 112th Congress,the Committee held numerous hearings, briefings, and meetings ona broad range of activities and programs performed by the seven-teen elements of the Intelligence Community. Examples of theseoversight activities include: the examination of intelligence supportto U.S. military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq; the continuedstudy of the threats posed by Iran; a review of the successful raidagainst Usama bin Ladin in Abbottabad, Pakistan; consideration oflegislative proposals designed to counter the unauthorized disclo-



8/36

2

sure of classified information to the media; and sustained concernabout the cybersecurity threat.During the 112th Congress, the Committee completed its study

begun in 2009 of the Central Intelligence Agencys detention andinterrogation program that was in operation from 2001 to 2009,and adopted a report, with minority views, that is currently beingreviewed by the Executive Branch. The Committee also began itsreview of the September 11, 2012, terrorist attacks against thetemporary U.S. mission facility in Benghazi, Libya, which resultedin the deaths of Ambassador John Christopher Stephens, State De-partment employee Sean Smith, and former Navy SEALs GlenDoherty and Tyrone Woods.

The Committee also arranged additional briefings relevant to in-telligence oversight in locations both at home and abroad on a widerange of issues affecting the Intelligence Community, initiated a

number of audits of Intelligence Community programs, received as-sistance from its Technical Advisory Group, and conducted five con-firmation hearings.

II. LEGISLATION

A. INTELLIGENCEAUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCALYEAR 2011

In the 112th Congress, the Committee placed a strong emphasison the continued enactment of annual intelligence authorizationacts. As described in the Committees report on its activities duringthe 111th Congress (S. Rpt. 1123), the Committee had begun itsconsideration of the Presidents fiscal year 2011 budget request forintelligence agencies funding levels and legislative proposals dur-ing 2010.

The Committees budget monitors during the 111th Congress

evaluated the budget requests for fiscal year 2011 submitted by theExecutive Branch for the civilian and military agencies and depart-ments of the Intelligence Community (IC). These reviews includedthe National Intelligence Program (NIP) and the Military Intel-ligence Program (MIP).

The intelligence entities covered by the annual budget reviewsinclude the Office of the Director of the National Intelligence(ODNI), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Defense Intel-ligence Agency (DIA), the National Security Agency (NSA), the Na-tional Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), the National Recon-naissance Office (NRO), the intelligence capabilities of the militaryservices and the Coast Guard, as well as the intelligence-relatedcomponents of the Federal Bureau of Intelligence (FBI), the De-partments of State, Treasury, Energy, and Homeland Security(DHS) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).

As part of its review, the Committee held closed budget hearingsin 2010 on the Presidents budget request for fiscal year 2011 atwhich senior IC officials testified. During briefings, and on site atIC agencies, Committee staff designated as budget monitors forparticular IC elements evaluated classified detailed budget jus-tifications submitted by the Executive Branch. Based on those re-views, the Committee prepared a classified annex to its annual au-thorization bill and report. This annex contained a classified sched-ule of authorizations and classified directions to IC elements that



9/36

3

addressed a wide range of issues identified during the annualbudget reviews and other Committee oversight activities.The Committee also reviewed the Administrations proposals for

the public part of the fiscal year 2011 bill consisting of new oramended legislative authority requested by the IC. The fiscal year2011 request was transmitted to the Committee by the Director ofNational Intelligence (DNI) on May 27, 2010, and was the subjectof a closed hearing on June 22, 2010.

In the first half of 2011, during the 112th Congress, the Com-mittee completed work on an intelligence authorization bill for fis-cal year 2011. The Committee reported S. 719 on April 4, 2011 (S.Rpt. 11212), and then worked with the House Permanent SelectCommittee on Intelligence and other congressional committees onH.R. 754, which was passed by the House of Representatives onMay 13, 2011, by a vote of 39215. The Senate passed H.R. 754 bya voice vote on May 26, 2011. It was signed into law on June 18,

2011 (Public Law 11218).The Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 author-

ized funding for fiscal year 2011 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities across the U.S. Government and included a classi-fied schedule of authorizations and classified annex. The Act con-tained a number of legislative provisions, including:

A section that requires the IC to implement fully by theend of 2013 automated information technology threat detectionprograms;

A provision improving the ability of government agenciesto detail personnel to needed areas of the IC; and

A commendation of IC personnel for their role in bringingUsama Bin Laden to justice and reaffirming the commitmentof the Congress to the use of the capabilities of the IC to dis-rupt, dismantle, and defeat al-Qaida and affiliated organiza-

tions.B. INTELLIGENCEAUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCALYEAR 2012

In early 2011, while finishing work on the fiscal year 2011 legis-lation, the Committee also began its consideration of the Presi-dents requests for funding levels and legislative authority for fiscalyear 2012. The Committees budget monitors evaluated the budgetrequests submitted by the Executive Branch, and the Committeecounsels and professional staff members reviewed the legislativerequests with intelligence agency officials. Committee staff heldbriefings at the Committee and on site at agencies, and the Com-mittee conducted closed budget hearings. The Committee receivedthe Administrations proposed fiscal year 2012 bill on June 8, 2011,and additional provisions on June 21, 2011. The Committee subse-quently posted on its website the full legislative request and an un-

classified version of a statement for the record concerning the fiscalyear 2012 legislative requests from Robert Litt, the ODNI GeneralCounsel.

The Committee reported S. 1458 on August 1, 2011 (S. Rpt. 11243), and then worked with the House Permanent Select Committeeon Intelligence and other congressional committees on H.R. 1892,the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012. This billwas passed by the House of Representatives on September 9, 2011,by a vote of 38414. The Senate passed an amendment in the na-



10/36

4

ture of a substitute to the House-passed bill by unanimous consenton December 14, 2011. The provisions of the bill were explained ina statement by Chairman Feinstein prior to its passage (157 Cong.Rec. S8617). The House subsequently suspended the rules andpassed the Senate amendment on December 16, 2011, by a vote of39623. The President signed the bill into law on January 2, 2012(Public Law 11287), which became the third intelligence author-ization bill signed into law within 15 months.

The Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 author-ized funding for fiscal year 2012 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities across the U.S. Government at essentially thesame level as fiscal year 2011 levels, representing a reduction fromthe Presidents request. The Act contained a number of legislativeprovisions, including:

New procurement authorities that enable intelligenceagencies to protect against supply chain risk to information

technologies; A provision that provides burial allowances for intelligence

employees killed in the line of duty, similar to those for mem-bers of the U.S. military;

A measure authorizing new accounts at the Department ofTreasury to enable defense intelligence agencies to become fi-nancially auditable;

Provisions to strengthen congressional oversight of thetransfer of detainees from Guantanamo Bay;

A requirement that the DNI establish and maintain on thepublicly accessible ODNI website information for contactingthe Inspector General of the Intelligence Community (IC IG);

A section to improve the accuracy of IC cost estimates; and Provisions that provide the DNI with needed personnel

management authorities.

C. INTELLIGENCEAUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCALYEAR 2013

During 2012, the Committee considered the Presidents requestsfor funding levels and legislative provisions for intelligence and in-telligence-related activities in fiscal year 2013. Again, the Commit-tees budget monitors evaluated the budget requests submitted bythe Executive Branch, and Committee counsels and professionalstaff members reviewed the legislative requests with intelligenceagency officials. Committee staff held briefings at the Committeeand on site at agencies, and the Committee conducted closed budg-et hearings as well as a closed hearing on the issues associatedwith the unauthorized disclosure of classified information. TheCommittee received the Administrations proposed fiscal year 2013bill on April 10, 2012. The Committee subsequently posted on itswebsite the full legislative request.

The Committee reported S. 3454, the Intelligence AuthorizationAct for Fiscal Year 2013, on July 30, 2012 (S. Rpt. 112192). Thebill and report were publicly available on the Committees websiteand the classified schedule of authorizations and classified annexwere available for all Senators to review in the Committees offices.Subsequently, the Committee worked with the House PermanentSelect Committee on Intelligence and other congressional commit-tees on a final version of the legislation, in this case an amendmentin the nature of a substitute to S. 3454. In addition, the Committee



11/36

5

considered the views presented to it by members of the public. OnDecember 28, 2012, the Senate passed by unanimous consent anamendment in the nature of a substitute offered by the Chairmanand Vice Chairman. The provisions of the bill were explained in astatement by Chairman Feinstein prior to the bills passage (158Cong. Rec. S. 85138516). The House of Representatives suspendedthe rules and passed S. 3454 as amended on December 31, 2012,by a vote of 37329. The President signed the bill into law on Janu-ary 14, 2013 (Public Law 112277).

The Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 author-ized funding for fiscal year 2013 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities across the U.S. Government, and included a clas-sified schedule of authorizations and classified annex. The Act con-tained a number of legislative provisions, including:

A requirement for notification on a timely basis to the con-gressional intelligence committees with respect to certain au-

thorized disclosures of national intelligence or intelligence re-lated to national security, with a one-year sunset;

A section that repeals four recurring reporting require-ments burdensome to IC agencies when the information insuch reports is duplicative or is provided to Congress throughother means;

A provision modifying personnel authorities to facilitatemore joint duty assignments within the IC that will createshared knowledge across different elements of the IC; and

A measure requiring corrective action plans to address theissue of improper payments made by intelligence agencies.

D. REAUTHORIZATION OF TITLEVII OF FISA

The Committee has been carefully monitoring the implementa-tion and use of the intelligence collection authorities contained in

the FISA Amendments Act since its enactment in the summer of2008 (Public Law 110261). On February 8, 2012, the Director ofNational Intelligence and the Attorney General wrote to the leader-ship of the Senate and the House of Representatives to urge thatCongress reauthorize Title VII of the FISA, which was scheduledto sunset on December 31, 2012. They stated that the authoritiesunder this title of FISA, which were added by the FISA Amend-ments Act of 2008, allow the Intelligence Community to collectvital information about international terrorists and other impor-tant targets overseas while providing a comprehensive regime ofoversight to protect the civil liberties and privacy of Americans.Subsequent to this request, the Committee held hearings to reviewissues related to the implementation of these authorities. In addi-tion, the Committee, in conjunction with the Senate Judiciary Com-mittee, participated in numerous Intelligence Community briefings

on FISA implementation and compliance issues. The DNI and At-torney General also provided an unclassified background paper onthe structure, operation, and oversight of Title VII. On March 26,2012, the DNI provided the Administrations proposed legislation toextend the sunset to June 1, 2017, and reauthorize Title VII with-out amendment. Both the background paper and the proposed leg-islation were made publicly available on the Committees website.

On May 22, 2012, the Committee voted 132 to report a bill, S.3276, the FAA Sunsets Extension Act of 2012, to extend the sunset



12/36

6

for Title VII of FISA to June 1, 2017, as requested by the Adminis-tration. In doing so, the Committee, by a vote of 132, rejectedamendments to the bill concerning prohibitions on acquisition of, orsearching contents of, communications of United States personsand requiring a report by the Inspector General of the Departmentof Justice and the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community(IC IG) on the implementation of the amendments made by theFISA Amendments Act of 2008. The bill and report (S. Rpt. 112174) were filed on June 7, 2012.

The Senate Judiciary Committee subsequently considered S.3276 on sequential referral and reported an amendment in the na-ture of a substitute on July 19, 2012. The Judiciary Committeefiled its report (S. Rpt. 112229) on September 20, 2012. Theamendment would have reduced the sunset for Title VII of FISAto June 1, 2015 (to align with three other provisions of FISA setto expire at that time), modified the scope of certain annual re-views submitted by the relevant agencies involved in the imple-mentation of Title VII, and required the IC IG to conduct a reviewof the implementation of Section 702 of FISA and, consistent withthe protection of national security, publicly release a summary ofthe conclusions of that review.

In the House of Representatives, the judiciary and intelligencecommittees both reported H.R. 5949, the FISA Amendments ActReauthorization Act of 2012, to extend the sunset of Title VII toDecember 31, 2017 (H. Rpt. 112645, Parts I and II). The Houseof Representatives considered the bill on September 12, 2012, andpassed it without amendment by a vote of 301118.

On December 27 and 28, 2012, the Senate considered H.R. 5949and four amendments. None of the amendments were adopted.H.R. 5949 was then approved by a vote of 7323 in the Senate andsigned into law on December 30, 2012 (Public Law 112238).

E. SENATE RESOLUTION (S. RES. 86) RECOGNIZING THE DEFENSEINTELLIGENCEAGENCY ON ITS 50THANNIVERSARY

In March 2011, the Chairman and Vice-Chairman, along withother Members of the Senate, sponsored S. Res. 86 honoring theDIA on its 50th Anniversary. The Senate adopted S. Res. 86 onMay 12, 2011. The resolution congratulated the men and women ofthe DIA on the occasion of the Agencys 50th Anniversary; honoredthe heroic sacrifice of the employees of the DIA who have giventheir lives, or have been wounded or injured, in the service of theUnited States during the past 50 years; and expressed gratitude toall the men and women of the DIA for their past and continued ef-forts to provide timely and accurate intelligence support to deliveroverwhelming advantage to our warfighters, defense planners, anddefense and national security policymakers in the defense and se-curity of the United States.

F. OTHER LEGISLATION

The Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Committee introduceda bill to authorize certain funds specifically for an intelligence orintelligence-related activity and for other purposes. The bill, S.3314, was held at the desk and passed the Senate without amend-ment on June 19, 2012. Chairman Feinstein explained the purpose



13/36

7

of the bill and its provisions in a statement before its passage (158Cong. Rec. S43074308). No further action on the bill occurred inthe House of Representatives.

The Committee also reviewed legislation produced by other Com-mittees and considered by the Senate to ensure that the views andequities of the Intelligence Community were appropriately consid-ered.

III. OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES

A. HEARINGS

1. Worldwide Threat

Since 1994, the Committee has held an annual Worldwide ThreatHearing to review the Intelligence Communitys assessment of thecurrent and projected national security threats to the United

States. These hearings cover national security concerns in all geo-graphic regions as well as transnational threats such as terrorismand the proliferation of missiles and weapons of mass destructionthat transcend borders. The Committee holds these hearings toeducate both the Congress and the American public about thethreats facing the country, the Intelligence Communitys analysisabout those threats, and how intelligence agencies with the appro-priate authorities are working to counter such threats.

On February 16, 2011, the Committee held an open hearing onthe current and projected threats to the United States. The leadwitness testifying before the Committee was James R. Clapper, thenewly confirmed Director of National Intelligence. He was joined byLeon Panetta, Director of the CIA; Robert S. Mueller III, Directorof the FBI; Lieutenant General Ronald L. Burgess, Jr., Director ofthe DIA; Philip Goldberg, Assistant Secretary of State for Intel-

ligence and Research; and Michael Leiter, Director of the NationalCounterterrorism Center. Director Clappers unclassified preparedstatement for the record is available in the Hearings section of theCommittees website and the record of the hearing has been print-ed as S. Hrg. 112252. A video recording of the full hearing canalso be found on the Committees website.

Director Clapper stated his belief that counterterrorism,counterproliferation, and counterintelligence are at the immediateforefront of our security concerns, but noted, It is virtually impos-sible to rankin terms of long-term importancethe numerous,potential threats to U.S. national security. He asserted that [t]heUnited States no longer facesas in the Cold Warone dominantthreat. Rather, it is the multiplicity and interconnectedness of po-tential threatsand the actors behind themthat constitute ourbiggest challenge. Indeed, even the three categories noted above

are also inextricably linked, reflecting a quickly changing inter-national environment of rising new powers, rapid diffusion ofpower to non-state actors and ever greater access by individualsand small groups to lethal technologies.

Director Clapper then explained the Intelligence Communitysrole concerning the quickly changing and complex international en-vironment. We in the Intelligence Community believe it is ourduty to work together as an integrated team to understand andmaster this complexity. By providing better strategic and tactical



14/36

8

intelligence, we can partner more effectively with other Govern-ment officials at home and abroad to protect our vital national in-terests.

On January 31, 2012, in the second session of the 112th Con-gress, the Committee held its annual open hearing on the currentand projected threats to the United States. DNI Clapper presenteda consolidated statement on behalf of the IC and was joined byDavid Petraeus, Director of the CIA; Robert S. Mueller III, Directorof the FBI; Lieutenant General Ronald L. Burgess, Jr., Director ofthe DIA; Philip Goldberg, Assistant Secretary of State for Intel-ligence and Research; Matthew Olsen, Director of the NationalCounterterrorism Center; and Caryn Wagner, Undersecretary forIntelligence and Analysis at the Department of Homeland Security.Director Clappers unclassified statement for the record is availablein the Hearings section of the Committees website and the record

of the hearing has been printed as S. Hrg. 112481. A video record-ing of the full hearing can also be found on the Committeeswebsite.

Director Clapper reprised his testimony from 2011, specificallynoting the difficulty in ranking, in terms of long-term importancethe numerous potential threats to U.S. national security, but add-ing a fourth category, cybersecurity, to the major categories ofthreats that face the United States.

Cyber threats, he said, pose a critical national and economic se-curity concern due to the continued advances inand growing de-pendency onthe information technology (IT) that underpins near-ly all aspects of modern society. Data collection, processing, stor-age, and transmission capabilities are increasing exponentially;meanwhile, mobile, wireless, and cloud computing bring the fullpower of the globally-connected Internet to myriad personal devices

and critical infrastructure. Owing to market incentives, innovationin functionality is outpacing innovation in security, and neither thepublic nor private sector has been successful at fully implementingexisting best practices.

Specifically highlighting China and Russia as being of particularconcern, Director Clapper suggested entities within these coun-tries are responsible for extensive illicit intrusions into U.S. com-puter networks and theft of U.S. intellectual property.

2. Afghanistan/Pakistan

While the Committees efforts in the 111th Congress focused onthe ICs role in supporting increased operations in Afghanistan (thesurge), the Committee in the 112th Congress held hearings onthree significant developments in the region: first, the killing ofUsama bin Laden (UBL) on May 1, 2011; second, the significant

deterioration in U.S.-Pakistan relations, beginning with the in-volvement of American Raymond Davis in a shooting in Lahoreearlier that year, through the UBL raid, and reaching a nadir withthe cross-border incident in November 2011, where Pakistanitroops were inadvertently killed by U.S. forces; and, third, the Ad-ministrations termination of the surge effort in Afghanistan andits signaling of a military drawdown leading to 2014. The Com-mittee spent considerable time and effort conducting oversight intothe significant intelligence issues related to all these developments.



15/36

9

Immediately following the raid in Abbottabad, Pakistan, thatkilled Usama bin Laden, the Committee heard testimony from nu-merous individuals on the conduct of the operation and the decade-long search that led to its successful execution.

Bilateral relations with Pakistan hit their lowest ebb in recenttimes during this period, affecting every aspect of the broad U.S.government engagement with that country. The Committee heldperiodic hearings and received numerous briefs on the implicationsof this breakdown in relations, which included a seven-month sus-pension of the military ground lines of communication that supportthe allied war effort in Afghanistan. In addition to focusing on ICactivities, the Committee was regularly briefed on assessments ofthe consequences of this breakdown on U.S. counterterrorism ef-forts in the terrorist safe haven in Pakistans tribal regions. Duringthe 112th Congress, the Committee took particular interest in in-

telligence assessments on the role the Haqqani network played inconducting operations against U.S., NATO, and Afghan militaryand civilian targets in Afghanistan.

Throughout the 112th Congress, the Committee conducted hear-ings and received briefings on IC assessments regarding thestrength and long-term viability of the Afghan insurgency and theimplications for long-term U.S. policy goals. As the Administrationdevelops its policy on Afghanistan, the Committee will continue toreview the role of the IC in implementing these policies, and howthese decisions affect current IC operations in the region.

3. Iran

The Committee held a number of hearings on Iran to evaluatethe Intelligence Communitys collection and analysis capabilities.Hearings provided Senators with: intelligence assessments about

Irans nuclear and weapons advances; its willingness to sponsorterrorist attacks in the United States or against our interestsabroad, particularly in the wake of the 2011 plot to assassinate theSaudi Ambassador to the United States; the impact of U.S. andinternational sanctions on Irans economy and decision making; thedomestic political problems confronting Irans leadership; andIrans efforts to spread its influence externally and exploit the ArabSpring by supporting proxies and surrogates abroad.

In addition to hearings, the Committee received regular briefingsand reports from the National Intelligence Council, Central Intel-ligence Agency, and elements of the Department of Defense, De-partment of State, and nongovernmental organizations. These ac-tivities supported oversight of the intelligence agencies and helpedto inform the legislative debate over the appropriate U.S. policy to-wards Iran.

4. Iraq

The Committee held a hearing and received briefings on the se-curity situation in Iraq and its effect on neighboring countries. Fur-ther, in the aftermath of the December 2011 withdrawal of U.S.forces, the Committee reviewed the IC resources dedicated to Iraqand subsequently worked to reduce unnecessary funding and per-sonnel devoted to intelligence issues involving that nation.



16/36

10

5. Unauthorized Disclosure of Classified Information to the Media(Leaks)

During the 112th Congress, the Committee held a hearing andnumerous staff briefings to review issues related to the Commit-tees continuing concern over unauthorized disclosures of classifiedinformation, particularly disclosures to the media. The Committeeheld a hearing with Ms. Lisa Monaco, Assistant Attorney Generalfor National Security, and Mr. Robert Litt, General Counsel for theODNI, to examine IC and law enforcement efforts to prevent andinvestigate unauthorized disclosures, as well as to prosecute, orotherwise hold accountable, those determined to be responsible forsuch disclosures.

In furtherance of the Committees efforts to address unauthor-ized disclosures of classified information, the Committee includeda provision in the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year2013, that requires, subject to certain specified exceptions, thatgovernment officials responsible for making certain authorized dis-closures of national intelligence or intelligence related to nationalsecurity notify the congressional intelligence committees on a time-ly basis with respect to such disclosures. This provision, Section504, is intended to ensure that the intelligence committees aremade aware of authorized disclosures of national intelligence or in-telligence related to national security that are made to media per-sonnel or likely to appear in the press, so that, among other things,these authorized disclosures may be distinguished from unauthor-ized leaks. Unless renewed, the provision will expire one yearafter enactment.

6. CIA Operation that Killed Usama bin Ladin

On May 1, 2011, U.S. forces operating under the authority of theDirector of the CIA killed al-Qaida leader Usama bin Ladin during

a raid on his compound in Abbottabad, Pakistanthe culminationof years of work by multiple intelligence agencies to locate him.Usama bin Ladin authorized the September 11, 2001, terrorist at-tacks that murdered 2,973 people in New York City, Arlington, Vir-ginia, and Shanksville, Pennsylvania. He was also responsible forother terrorist attacks against the United States and its allies, in-cluding the East Africa embassy bombings, the attack on the USSCole, and the Bali, Madrid, and London bombings. The Chairmanand Vice Chairman had been briefed on the intelligence regardingbin Ladens location prior to the strike, and the Committee wasbriefed on the raid immediately after it took place. The Committeeheld subsequent hearings and staff briefings on the operation, in-cluding a joint hearing with the Senate Armed Services Committee.These hearings focused on the details of the operation itself, as wellas the intelligence collection and analysis that led to the identifica-

tion of the Abbottabad compound. Later briefings examined the in-telligence gathered in the aftermath of the raid, the effects on U.S.counterterrorism efforts that stemmed from the killing of binLaden, and the lessons learned from this successful intelligence op-eration.

7. Oversight of Intelligence Community Counterterrorism Efforts

The Committee during the 112th Congress continued its over-sight of the ICs role in U.S. counterterrorism efforts. The Com-



17/36

11

mittee continued its practice of conducting regularly scheduledmeetings on this subject with IC personnel, including from the Na-tional Counterterrorism Center and the FBI, and held numeroushearings and briefings with IC agency heads and staff as well.

In particular, the Committee has devoted significant time and at-tention to targeted killings. As part of this continuing effort, theCommittee staff during the 112th Congress held 23 in-depth over-sight meetings with government officials to review operations, ex-amine their effectiveness, verify the care taken to avoid non-com-batant deaths, and understand the related intelligence collectionand analysis. In addition, the Committee has worked with the in-volved organizations and the Department of Justice to understandthe legal basis supporting targeted killing.

Additionally, the Committee has conducted oversight of the im-plementation of new policies and practices in the area of interroga-

tion, such as the establishment and operations of the High-ValueDetainee Interrogation Group. It has also increased its focus on re-lations between the IC and foreign liaison partners.

8. Cybersecurity

The Committee held four hearings on cybersecurity-related mat-ters in the 112th Congress. Additionally, Committee staff met fre-quently with Intelligence Community and other government offi-cials, and with private sector entities involved in cybersecurity ef-forts. These hearings, briefings, and meetings kept the Committeeinformed of the governments cybersecurity programs and the pri-vate sectors cyber capabilities, vulnerabilities, and concerns. Withthe governments increasing focus on countering cyber threats, in-vestments in cyber security programs are increasing. To evaluatethese investments, the Committee has pressed the IC for more

meaningful measures of effectiveness of its cyber security pro-grams.One noteworthy government-led effort is the Defense Industrial

Base (DIB) Pilot. On June 10, 2010, the Deputy Secretary of De-fense issued a memo directing the Director of the NSA to workwith the private sector to increase the level of DIB cybersecurityprotection. The DIB Pilot established legal, operational, and tech-nical mechanisms to enable the use of United States Governmentcyber threat information to protect participating DIB companies.

9. Covert action

The Committee continued to conduct vigorous oversight of covertaction programs throughout the 112th Congress. The Committeesrules require the Committees Staff Director to ensure that covertaction programs of the United States government receive appro-

priate consideration once a quarter. In accordance with this rule,the Committee receives a written report every quarter on each cov-ert action that is being carried out under a presidential finding.Committee staff reviews these reports and meet with IntelligenceCommunity personnel to discuss their substance and pose addi-tional questions. The Committee also holds periodic hearings andbriefings on covert action programs, and receives reviews of covertactions from the CIA Inspector General, which are often the basisfor additional staff inquiries.



18/36

12

Further, under the National Security Act, the DNI and the headsof all departments, agencies, and entities of the United States gov-ernment involved in a covert action are required to keep the con-gressional intelligence committees fully and currently informed ofall covert actions that are the responsibility of, are engaged in by,or are carried out for or on behalf of any department or agency ofthe United States. Upon receiving such notifications, the Com-mittee reviews the details of each notification and receives brief-ings to understand the issues related to them more fully.

The Committee seeks to ensure that covert action programs areconsistent with United States foreign policy goals, and conductedin accordance with all applicable U.S. laws. The Committee pur-sues its oversight responsibilities for covert action with the under-standing that these programs can be a significant factor in accom-plishing foreign policy objectives.

10. Counterproliferation

The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction remains a sig-nificant threat to U.S. national security interests and a major focusof the IC. At the Worldwide Threat Hearing in 2012, DNI Clapperdescribed efforts to develop, acquire, or spread weapons of mass de-struction as a major global strategic threat. Therefore, during the112th Congress, the Committee continued to conduct oversight ofthe ICs counterproliferation collection posture and analytic capa-bilities. The Committee met regularly with the National Counter-proliferation Center and various components in the intelligenceagencies with counterproliferation responsibilities to receive up-dates on issues of importance. Additionally, the Committee held anumber of hearings and briefings on the proliferation activities ofcountries of interest.

11. Implementation of FISA Authorities

During the 112th Congress, the Committee held hearings andconducted numerous staff briefings to review issues related to theimplementation of surveillance authorities contained in FISA.These issues included implementation of Title VII authorities,which were subject to sunset on December 31, 2012, as well asissues associated with the implementation of other provisions ofFISA, such as Title IV (Pen Registers and Trap and Trace Devicesfor Foreign Intelligence Purposes) and Title V (Access to CertainBusiness Records for Foreign Intelligence Purposes).

In furtherance of its oversight, the Committee also reviewed re-porting required under provisions in FISA, including the annualand semi-annual reports from the Attorney General, the DNI, andrelevant agency heads and inspectors general. By operation of Sec-tion 601(c) of FISA (50 U.S.C. 1871(c)), the Committee obtainedcopies of classified decisions, orders, and opinions of the FISACourt that include significant construction or interpretation of anyprovision, as well as the related pleadings, applications, andmemoranda of law. The Committee routinely examined these docu-ments and they were the subject of subsequent briefings and hear-ings involving officials from the Department of Justice and the In-telligence Community.



19/36

13

B. INQUIRIES AND

REVIEWS

1. Study of the CIAs Detention and Interrogation Program

The Committees Study of the CIAs Detention and InterrogationProgram was an outgrowth of previous oversight activity by theCommittee. In December 2007, after press accounts stated that theCIA had possessed and destroyed videotapes of the interrogationsof CIA detainees, the Committee initiated a review of CIA oper-ational documents related to the CIAs detention and interrogationprogram.

On March 5, 2009, by a vote of 14 to 1, the Committee approvedterms of reference for a broader study of the CIAs detention andinterrogation program. The Study proceeded in a bi-partisan man-ner until August 24, 2009, when Attorney General Holder an-nounced that the Department of Justice had re-opened a prelimi-

nary review into whether federal criminal laws were violated inconnection with the interrogation of specific detainees at overseaslocations. Believing that this decision would likely preclude inter-views with the most relevant Intelligence Community personnel,then-Vice Chairman Christopher Kit Bond withdrew his stafffrom further active participation in the Study.

In spite of these obstacles, the Committee devoted considerableresources to completing the Study. The document production phaselasted more than three years, produced more than 6 million pagesof material, and was completed in July 2012. The Study is basedprimarily on a review of these documents, which include cable traf-fic, reports, memoranda, intelligence products, records of interviewsconducted of CIA personnel by the CIAs Office of the InspectorGeneral and other CIA entities, as well as internal email and othercommunications. The Committee did not interview Intelligence

Community personnel during the course of conducting the Study,due to the ongoing Department of Justice criminal investigation.In addition to CIA materials, the Committee reviewed a smaller

quantity of documents from other Executive Branch elements, aswell as documents and information that had been provided sepa-rately to the Committee outside of the Committees Study.

On December 13, 2012, the Committee approved its report on theCIAs Detention and Interrogation Program, by a vote of 9 to 6. TheCommittee Study is a highly detailed report that exceeds 6,000pages and includes approximately 35,000 footnotes. It is dividedinto three volumes:

I. History and Operation of the CIAs Detention and InterrogationProgram. This volume is divided chronologically into sections ad-dressing the establishment, development, and evolution of the CIAdetention and interrogation program.

II. Intelligence Acquired and CIA Representations on the Effec-tiveness of the CIAs Enhanced Interrogation Techniques. This vol-ume addresses the intelligence attributed to CIA detainees and theuse of the CIAs enhanced interrogation techniques, specifically fo-cusing on CIA representations on how the CIA detention and inter-rogation program was operated and managed, as well as the effec-tiveness of the interrogation program. It includes sections on CIArepresentations to the Congress, the Department of Justice, andthe media.



20/36

14

III. Detention and Interrogation of Detainees. This volume ad-dresses the detention and interrogation of all known CIA detainees,from the programs inception to its official end, on January 22,2009, to include information on their capture, detention, interroga-tion, and conditions of confinement. It also includes extensive infor-mation on the CIAs management, oversight, and day-to-day oper-ation of the CIAs detention and interrogation program.

The Committee has provided copies of the Study to the CentralIntelligence Agency, the White House, the Department of State, theDepartment of Justice, and the Office of the Director of NationalIntelligence, with a request that the White House coordinate com-ments from all relevant Executive Branch agencies. Although theCommittee had asked that these comments be provided by Feb-ruary 15, 2013, the Administration has requested an extension oftime to provide feedback on the report. Vice Chairman Chamblissand Senators Burr, Risch, Coats, Blunt, and Rubio filed their mi-

nority views on February 15, 2013, in which they presented thebasis for their disagreement with the reports conclusions, particu-larly regarding the effectiveness of the program and the CIAs rep-resentations to policymakers, and explained their reasons for op-posing the final report. Once the Committee receives the Adminis-trations feedback, it will consider the comments, discuss rec-ommendations for reform, as well as discuss the public release ofthe Study, including the minority views.

2. Committee Review of Intelligence Issues Related to the September11, 2012, Terrorist Attacks in Benghazi, Libya

Shortly after the September 11, 2012, attacks on U.S. diplomaticfacilities in Benghazi, Libya, the Committee began a review of In-telligence Community documents to understand fully the eventssurrounding this terrorist attack. The Committees review has fo-

cused on: (1) the intelligence collection, analysis, and threat report-ing relating to Libya and other Middle East countries prior to theSeptember 11 attacks; (2) how, when, and to whom that informa-tion was disseminated; and (3) what actions were taken in re-sponse. The Committee has gathered facts on what is now knownabout the events of September 11, who was responsible for the at-tacks, and what efforts are being made to bring them to justice. Inaddition, the Committee has focused on the ICs collection capabili-ties in the Middle East and North Africa, to include the levels offunding and availability of intelligence personnel with languageand other skills necessary to operate in that part of the world. Fi-nally, the Committee has sought to examine the level and adequacyof security at U.S. government facilities in the Middle East andNorth Africa, and whether current security arrangements at thesehigh-threat facilities are appropriate in light of what the Com-

mittee has learned about the Benghazi attacks.The Committee held four closed hearings to look into the cir-cumstancesincluding the intelligence and security situationsur-rounding the attacks, and the intelligence and security situation inother countries in North Africa and the Middle East. By the endof the 112th Congress, the Committee had also received staff-levelbriefings and conducted formal interviews, some of which havebeen on the record, and continued to examine relevant informationand documents, including thousands of pages of intelligence pro-



21/36

15

vided by the IC and the Departments of State and Defense. TheCommittee intends to complete this review and issue its findingsearly in the 113th Congress.

C. INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITYISSUES

1. Response to Unauthorized Disclosures of Classified Information

The Committee continued its oversight, begun in the 111th Con-gress, of the ODNIs response to unauthorized disclosures of classi-fied information. In 2012, the Committee became increasingly con-cerned about the accelerating pace of such disclosures, the sensi-tivity of the matters in question, and the harm caused to our na-tional security interests. Committee members expressed concernsthat each disclosure puts American lives at risk, threatens ongoinghuman and technical intelligence operations, makes it more dif-ficult to recruit assets, strains the trust of liaison partners, and

threatens imminent and irreparable damage to our national secu-rity in the face of urgent and rapidly adapting threats worldwide.

In furtherance of this effort, the Committee met with DNI Clap-per in a closed session on June 2012 to underscore the need for theExecutive Branch to take tangible and demonstrable steps to detectand deter intelligence leaks, and to fully, fairly, and impartially in-vestigate the disclosures that have already taken place. The IClater implemented changes to address leaks, including in the ex-panded use of the polygraph and directing the IC IG to lead inde-pendent administrative investigations of select unauthorized disclo-sure cases.

As part of its review of unauthorized disclosures, in June 2012the Committee met with the National Counterintelligence Execu-tive (NCIX) Frank Montoya, Jr., regarding the role of the Office ofthe NCIX (ONCIX) in preventing, detecting, and investigating un-

authorized disclosures of classified information. The Committeealso held briefings with key ODNI officials responsible for imple-menting these policies, including the head of ONCIXs Special Se-curity Directorate and the IC IG Chief of Investigations. The Com-mittees review also focused on Intelligence Community Directive(ICD) 700, which among other things, designated the NCIX to fa-cilitate and monitor the implementation and effectiveness of ICcounterintelligence and security policies, procedures, and programs,and to develop recommendations for new or modified policies. TheCommittee also received an update on implementation of reformsfrom NCIX Montoya in October 2012.

2. Information Sharing

The Committee continued its oversight of the efforts of the ODNIto improve the discoverability and sharing of information across

the IC. Specifically, the Committee focused on the implementationof ICD 501Discovery and Dissemination or Retrieval of Informa-tion within the Intelligence Community, approved January 21,2009, which is meant to ensure that information necessary for in-telligence officials to perform their mission is made available in asystemic and routine fashion, with the goal of providing more accu-rate, timely, and insightful analysis to inform decision-making. Aspart of this review, the Committee found that while the ODNI andother agencies have made progress when it comes to secure infor-



22/36

16

mation sharing across the government and with external partners,critical challenges remain. For example, the Committee noted evi-dence of backlogs in reviewing vital intelligence and disseminatingsuch information across the IC.

In response, the Committee held a series of meetings with ODNIofficials responsible for effective information sharing and collabora-tion in the IC, including the Deputy Director for Intelligence Inte-gration (DDII), the IC Chief Information Officer, the IC Informa-tion Sharing Executive, and the Program Manager of the Informa-tion Sharing Environment (PMISE), to address these issues. Alsoof note, the PMISEs 2012 Annual Report, issued in June 2012,stated that the biggest challenges facing IC information sharing ef-forts include the continuously evolving threat environment, thetsunami of new data, and a constrained fiscal environment. TheCommittee recognizes these challenges and will continue to pressthe ODNI to improve discoverability and sharing of information in

fulfillment of ICD 501.

3. Strategic Plan

In February 2012, the DNI submitted to the Committee theODNI Strategic Plan, which is intended to set the ODNIs directionfor the next four years and offer a clear path forward to advanceintelligence integration. In a series of briefings to the Committee,ODNI officials emphasized the following goals and objectives of theStrategic Plan: responsible and secure information sharing; imple-mentation of the Unifying Intelligence Strategies; strengthening ofpartnerships; advancement of cutting-edge capabilities; and thepromotion of a diverse, highly skilled workforce.

The Committee reviewed the ODNI Strategic Plan and supple-mental material such as the Strategic Human Capital Plan. Aspart of this process, the Committee requested information regard-

ing the delegation of responsibilities within the ODNI for imple-mentation of the Strategic Plan, including appropriate studies andevaluations, performance measures and targets, milestones,deliverables, and engagement with other IC elements. The Com-mittee emphasized to the ODNI that specific and quantifiable per-formance measures and the identification of the entities respon-sible for communicating the plan across the IC would be essentialto successful implementation of the Strategic Plan. Additionally,the Committee reviewed the ODNIs plan to expand the number of

joint duty assignments available to its workforce with the goal ofbringing in personnel with diverse backgrounds and experiences asa means of furthering intelligence integration. The Committee re-quested that the ODNI continue to provide information on its ef-forts to enhance workplace communication, ensure fair and opencompetition, and encourage employee engagement.

4. Role of the Intelligence Community in the United States ExportControl Regime

The Committee in its report to accompany the Intelligence Au-thorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 requested that the DNI pro-vide to the congressional intelligence committees a full descriptionof the ICs participation in, and contributions made to, the exportcontrol decision-making processes of the United States government.The Committee requested that the report address the following in-



23/36

17

formation: which IC agencies contribute to the export control re-view process; the level at which agency contributions are made, in-cluding hours of personnel effort involved; the process for identi-fying and closing intelligence gaps related to understanding foreigntechnological capabilities and potential threats; the opportunitiesthat may exist for new collection and analysis activity; the authori-ties under which IC agencies provide input into the export controlprocess; the training available on export control processes for ICpersonnel; and any recommendations for improvements that shouldbe made in the decision-making processes involving the IC. TheCommittee received this report at the end of this period and willuse its information to guide oversight of IC participation in thisprocess.

5. Core Contractors

The Committee has been concerned about the dramatic increase

in the use of contractors by the IC since 9/11. While contractors canserve an important role in providing expertise and filling an emerg-ing need quickly, the Committee notes that contractor personnelcosts tend to be substantially more than government personnelrates. The Committee commends the IC for its efforts over the pastfew years to reduce core contractors and to convert core contractorswhere appropriate to government employees. However, data re-viewed by the Committee indicate that some elements of the IChave been hiring additional contractors after they have convertedor otherwise removed other contractors, resulting in an overallworkforce that continues to grow. Thus, the Committee rec-ommended in the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year2012 that all elements of the IC should be able to track the numberof its core contractors on a regular basis. During this period, ICagencies only had the capability to compile data on contractors

once a year to respond to the ODNI core contractor review. TheCommittee continued to work with the IC elements in order thateach would be able to determine its use of core contractors on aweekly or monthly basis.

6. Comptroller General Access to Intelligence Community Informa-tion

The Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 requiredthe DNI, in consultation with the Comptroller General, to issue awritten directive governing access of the Government Account-ability Office (GAO) to certain information in possession of the In-telligence Community. In response, the DNI in April 2011 issuedICD 114, which states that it is IC policy to cooperate with GAOaudits and reviews to the fullest extent possible and make informa-tion available to appropriately cleared GAO personnel. As a result,

the Committee conducted oversight on ICD 114, meeting multipletimes with ODNI and GAO officials to encourage open lines of com-munication and collaboration between the two entities to ensure ac-countability and appropriate levels of transparency for IntelligenceCommunity activities.

ICD 114 also states that certain information that falls within thepurview of the congressional intelligence oversight committees, in-cluding information regarding intelligence collection operations,intelligence analyses and analytical techniques, counterintelligence



24/36

18

operations, and intelligence funding, generally shall not be madeavailable to the GAO to support a GAO audit or review of core na-tional intelligence capabilities or activities. Thus, the Committeespent time examining the issues involving implementation of thisprovision.

7. Cyber Analysis

During the Committees January 31, 2012, Worldwide ThreatHearing, DNI Clapper noted that the Intelligence Community nowviewed cyber threats in the same category as terrorism and pro-liferation of weapons of mass destruction, saying: The cyber threatis one of the most challenging ones we face.

Given the importance of cyber threat analysis to meeting thischallenge, the Committee undertook an initiative to study the ICscyber analytic programs and workforce. Over the course of 2012,

the Committee gathered information from every Intelligence Com-munity agency with a cyber-security mission on the agencys ana-lytic missions, production priorities, information discovery andsharing tools, and workforce for the communitys cyber analysisprograms. The Committee is currently reviewing this informationand expects the results to inform its oversight of the scope, focus,supporting technologies, and resources devoted to the ICs cyberanalytic mission.

8. Analysis on North Korea

As part of its effort to focus more intently on specific IC analyticprograms and resources, the Committee in 2012 undertook an ini-tiative to study the Intelligence Communitys analytic programsand workforce related to North Korea. The Committee gathered in-formation from numerous IC agencies with a mission to analyze

North Korea and is currently reviewing each agencys analytic mis-sions, production priorities, information discovery and sharingtools, and overall workforce in this area.

9. Intelligence Advance Research Projects Activity

The Committee views the role of the Intelligence Advanced Re-search Projects Activity (IARPA) as important to the success of ICresearch and technology investment and maintenance of the U.S.Governments strategic advantage. In 2011, the Committee notedthat narrow contracting authorities have hampered IARPA.IARPAs current ability to issue solicitations and make selectionsworks well, but other contracting authorities seem to be inad-equate. Once IARPA identifies an entity with a promising researchproposal, it requires nine months or more to put a contract inplace. Some sources of innovative research, such as small busi-nesses, cannot afford to wait nearly a year for an opportunity towork with IARPA. Therefore, the Committee in the report to ac-company the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 re-quested that the DNI reevaluate the authorities delegated to theDirector of IARPA and look for additional opportunities to delegateadditional authorities to better support IARPAs mission. As a re-sult of this inquiry, the DNI issued new interim policy documentsand reformed the contracting authorities provided to IARPA.



25/36

19

10. Intelligence Community Information Technology EnterpriseIn an October 17, 2011, speech, Director Clapper announced hisintent to find substantial cost savings in the ICs Information Tech-nology (IT) budgets over the next ten years. The DNI stated thatIT costs totaled 20 to 25 percent of the ICs fiscal year 2012 requestand established a goal of finding one-half the needed savings underthe Budget Control Act of 2011 (Public Law 11225), for the ICthrough IT efficiencies. Since the DNIs announcement, the Intel-ligence Community Chief Information Officer (IC CIO) has led aneffort to create a community-wide information technology enter-prise.

In response to this initiative, the Committee held quarterly re-views of these IC IT plans, and identified to the IC shortfalls intechnical and programmatic rigor that could undermine theachievement of its goals. The Committee plans to continue to re-view the ICs plans to achieve IT efficiencies.

11. Space Launch

The Committee remains concerned over space launch costs, par-ticularly of the Air Forces Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle(EELV) program. Although actions taken by both the UnitedLaunch Alliance (ULA) and the U.S. Air Force seem to have cur-tailed this cost growth in the near term, the Committee continuesto believe additional efficiencies and savings are necessary in theEELV program.

The Committee believes it is in the nations economic and na-tional security interests to promote competition among U.S. spacelaunch providers, and to do so as soon as potential competitors areviable. Therefore, the Committee included language in both its re-port to accompany S. 1458, the Intelligence Authorization Act forFiscal Year 2012 (S. Rpt. 11243), and its report to accompany S.

3454, the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (S.Rpt. 112192), recommending that the NRO pursue a space launchpolicy that encourages competition in this area. In September 2012,the U.S. Air Force and the NRO announced an updated policy thatprovided for new entrants to be certified and compete for futurespace launch contracts.

12. Defense Clandestine Service and Defense Intelligence Agency Vi-sion 2020

During the 112th Congress, the Undersecretary of Defense forIntelligence (USDI) and the Director of the DIA announced publiclytheir intentions to create a Defense Clandestine Service (DCS) andconsolidate the management of Department of Defense human in-telligence collection. Further, according to the Defense Intelligence

Agency Vision 2020, the DIA also plans to reorganize its direc-

torates to focus on and support its human intelligence collectionmission.The Committee reviewed the DIAs plans for both the DCS and

its reorganization, and found that they lacked details necessary foreffective review and implementation. As a result, the Committeeincluded a provision in the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal

Year 2013 requesting a more detailed plan from the DIA on howit plans to implement its DCS initiative and reorganization. Thisreview is continuing into the new Congress.



26/36

20

13. AnalysisThe Committee continued to focus on the progress of the Intel-ligence Communitys analytic transformation as well as the processof analysis and the quality of analytic products produced by the IC.The Committee conducted ongoing reviews of IC and individualagency efforts to: create and follow community-wide standards ofanalytic tradecraft; resource analytic organizations with sufficientpersonnel through recruitment, training, utilization, and retention;determine the level and depth of analytic collaboration and intel-ligence-sharing within and among intelligence agencies; and assessthe balance between the ICs focus on reporting current threatsversus long-term analysis.

The Committee also focused on the specific roles and missions ofvarious IC analytic organizations, seeking to encourage reductionsin, or elimination of, organizations with redundant or duplicativemissions and responsibilities. The Committee examined the ICsanalytic workforce to determine if the specific analytic personnelrequests within each agency were justified, and looked across theentire IC to determine if agencies had redundant analytic port-folios. During this period, some agencies continued to realign ana-lytic priorities, but also began to reduce levels of growth in com-parison to prior years levels.

The Committee received substantive briefings from analytic orga-nizations within the IC; hosted and attended analytic roundtableson a range of regional and functional analysis; conducted analysisoversight meetings with senior analysts and analytic managers;and met with the ICs Analytic Ombudsman to discuss the statusand future of analytic reforms within the IC. These activities sup-ported intelligence oversight in general, but specifically contributedto focusing the IC on the improvement of overall analytic quality.

14. Committee Review of Arab Spring Analysis and ProductionIn 2011 and 2012, many countries in the Middle East and North

Africa went through widespread civil unrest that led to the over-throw of their political leadership and significant changes in theirpolitical, military, and economic institutions. At the start of theseevents in early 2011, the Committee reviewed the ICs pertinent re-gional analysis and production to determine how well the IC wasable to provide warning on the events leading up to and imme-diately following the so-called Arab Spring. The Committeelooked at the manner, degree, and timing of the ICs warning prod-ucts and its assessments, judgments, and predictions of key eventsand changes that were occurring across the region. As part of thisreview, the Committee also reviewed the ICs collection capabilitiesin the region, to include its ability to track social media and theavailability of intelligence personnel with the language skills nec-

essary to operate in that part of the world. The Committee also ex-amined lessons learned by the IC as it reallocated resources andchanged analytic priorities to meet the challenges created by thenew political realities in the region.

15. Foreign Language Capabilities

The Committee continued to focus on the foreign language re-quirements and capabilities of the Intelligence Community in orderto discern the specific issues that contribute to the ICs overall def-



27/36

21

icit in foreign language capability. The Committee examined indi-vidual IC Agency language requirements and capabilities and fo-cused across the IC on language training and education issues, for-eign language professional retention and incentive programs, lin-guist utilization, and language use and maintenance pay. While in-cremental improvements are underway in several agencies, theCommittee found that foreign language improvement across the IChas been intermittent and inconsistent. As a result, the Committeeacknowledges the need to continue its oversight efforts in this areaand press for better foreign language capabilities within the IC.

16. Education and Training

During 2011 and 2012, the Committee assessed the wide rangeof educational, training, internship, and scholarship programswithin and associated with the Intelligence Community. On atleast an annual basis, the Committee met with Program Directors

and managers from the IC Centers of Academic Excellence (CAE)in National Security Studies Program, NSAs Centers of AcademicExcellence Program, the National Security Education Program(NSEP), Boren Scholars, and the National Intelligence University.In particular, the Committee reviewed the IC CAE in National Se-curity Studies Program as the program moved from the ODNI tothe DIA in 2012.

The IC educational and training programs are designed to edu-cate and train a broad spectrum of professionals capable of contrib-uting to the national security of the United States or to offer spe-cialized courses and degree programs in intelligence studies to cur-rent IC employees. In multiple meetings with academic profes-sionals and program managers, the Committee explored the scope,scale, and resourcing of these programs. It also examined how suc-cessful these programs have been in increasing the number of

knowledgeable and trained national security professionals fromwhich the IC can recruit as well as provide continuing educationopportunities for current IC employees.

17. Counterintelligence

During the 112th Congress, the Intelligence Committee con-ducted reviews and held oversight briefings on the state of counter-intelligence in the IC. The Committee examined specific counter-intelligence failures and the steps taken to address them, as wellas the resources and emphasis devoted to counterintelligence mat-ters more generally. In addition, the Committee looked at specificcounterintelligence disciplines to ascertain whether there was suffi-cient coordination, prioritization, and direction to ensure vital na-tional security information was protected.

18. Accounting Standards and Auditability

The Fiscal Year 2002 Intelligence Authorization Act required theCIA, DIA, NGA, NRO, and NSA to produce auditable financialstatements by March 1, 2005. This deadline was extended severaltimes as the IC struggled to make progress over the last decade.Section 369 of the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year2010, directed the DNI to develop a plan and schedule to achievea full, unqualified audit of each element of the intelligence commu-nity not later than September 30, 2013.



28/36

22

During the 112th Congress, the Committee held periodic brief-ings with the IC, to include Chief Financial Officers, InspectorsGeneral, and other officials to determine and assess progress madetowards achieving financial auditability by 2013. The Committeewill continue to hold regular meetings with financial managers tomeasure the ICs progress on this issue.

19. Improper Payments

In 2012, the Inspectors General of CIA, DIA, NGA, NSA, NRO,and the ODNI all produced audit reports covering their agenciescompliance with the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery

Act (IPERA). These reports showed that all of the agencies failedto comply fully with IPERA. Accordingly, the Committee includeda provision in the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year2013 that requires agencies to submit corrective action plans tobring them into compliance by the end of Fiscal Year 2013.

D. AUDITS

During the 112th Congress, the Committee conducted audits ofthe ICs insider threat detection capabilities and the DHS Office ofIntelligence and Analysis, as well as reviews of Unifying Intel-ligence Strategies and IC data centers. In addition to theseprojects, it conducted limited reviews of software licensing in theIC and compensation for executives of Federally Funded Researchand Development Centers. Staff also commenced preliminary re-search on: (1) assessing the ICs management and use of senior ex-ecutives; and (2) the use of Originator Control (ORCON) restric-tions on classified information.

1. Insider Threat Detection Capabilities

Beginning in May 2011, the Committees Audits and Oversightstaff conducted a review of IC insider threat detection capabilitiesat the CIA, DIA, FBI, NGA, and NSA. The review determined thatin the wake of the WikiLeaks disclosures, IC elements were im-proving their abilities to detect and deter insider threats, but thereview also noted wide disparities in agencies capabilities requir-ing attention and remediation. The review concluded that the ICshould improve the structure and management of insider threatprograms within IC agencies, and that the DNI should issue IC-wide policies governing security and counterintelligence moni-toring.

2. Unifying Intelligence Strategies

In 2010, the DNI published a new mission statement for theODNI, which was to lead intelligence integration by developing

and implementing Unifying Intelligence Strategies (UISs) acrossthe Intelligence Community. Beginning in May 2011, the Com-mittee commenced a review of the UISs to include evaluating theextent to which the UISs contribute to the decision making processfor resource allocation, analytic focus, and collection strategies.

As a result of these efforts, the Committee learned that the UISshad not been completed with sufficient detail and uniformity, andrecommended that the DNI rewrite the strategy documents withincreased standardization. Additionally, the Committee required



29/36

23

the DNI to identify changes in the National Intelligence Programbudget request for fiscal year 2013 that were driven by the UISs.

3. Department of Homeland Securitys Office of Intelligence andAnalysis

In November 2011, the Committee began a mission review of theDHSs senior intelligence component, the Office of Intelligence and

Analysis. This review focused on the authorities, resources, andperformance of the office with respect to its requirements in statuteand policy. The review will continue during the 113th Congress.

4. Intelligence Community Data Centers

The Committee conducted a review in October 2011 to assess theICs plan for its data centers and determine whether any of the les-sons learned from the rest of government regarding data centerconsolidation were being applied effectively. The key finding was

that the IC not only lacked a strategy, but it also lacked a com-prehensive inventory of the data centers. Shortly after this assess-ment commenced, the DNI announced his intent to cancel theyears-long effort to establish one consolidated IC Data Center andinstead pursue a migration to cloud computing. As a result, theCommittee has since focused its oversight efforts on the establish-ment of cloud computing in the IC.

5. Compensation of Federally Funded Research and DevelopmentCenter Executives

The Committee conducted a preliminary review of compensationfor senior executives at Federally Funded Research and Develop-ment Centers. These centers are hybrid, quasi-governmental orga-nizations that are intended to provide services to federal agenciesthat cannot be met effectively by either government or private con-

tractors. When the review revealed concerns with the costs of exec-utive compensation packages in nearly all centers conducting workfor the IC, the Committee worked with the Senate Homeland Secu-rity and Government Affairs Committee to examine these concernsgovernment-wide. Through these joint efforts, the GAO is currentlyscheduled to assess the compensation for these executives.

E. TECHNICALADVISORY GROUP REPORTS

The Committees Technical Advisory Group (TAG) is a panel ofnationally recognized, distinguished experts in various scientificdisciplines who volunteer their time to assist the SSCI

Documents

US Congressional Oversight of Intelligence (2011-12)