ERD Ey R } fosiie, bi \ 89R001100020001-7 f " 1A ss a - Approved For Release 2004 08N6 - f ;RDPpé 007 APPENDIX A ee Historical Overview a ere (S/NOFORN) Concept Approval: Commander, US Army Materiel Development and Readiness Command approved in principle the US Army Material Systems Analysis Activity (AMSAA) involvement in the GRILL FLAME (GF) project, which began in April 1978 (GF was the predecessor to the SUN STREAK Project). In May 1978, the Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence (ACST) accepted lead responsibility for GF applications. Effective 14 January 1981, by approval of the Under Secretary of the Army, INSCOM became the only operational GF element in the Army. Program management for GF was transferred to Commander, INSCOM effective 11 February 1981. OACSI, DAMI-ISH remained the Army focal point for policy matters and interface at the national level. The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) maintained overall DoD responsibility. Also in 1981, a joint services GF Committee consisting of DIA, Air Force and Army was formed. Later the Air Force Chief of Staff directed that the Air Force withdraw from the committee and all psychoenergetic programs. A comprehensive program was designed to determine the operational parameters and usefulness of psychoenergetics and assess the threat these phenomena posed to national security. At that time DIA was R&D oriented and INSCOM's portion of GF was applications oriented. In the FY83 DoD budget review the Budget Subcommittee of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence curtailed all psychoenergetic activities funded by the Army in the National Foreign Intelligence Program (NFIP), but directed that DIA could complete the third year of their effort and that all future Army funding be budgeted outside the NFIP. INSCOM terminated formal involvement with GF at the end of FY 82; in the fall of 1982, in keeping with congressional desires, the Commanding General INSCOM provided funding from Security and Investigative Activities (S&IA) monies, and continued its efforts under a provisional compartmented SAP nicknamed CENTER LANE (CL). On 1 September 1983, the Secretary of the Army approved continued Army participation in CL activities within INSCOM and with appropriate contractors in a cooperative effort with DIA. In July 1984, CG, INSCOM determined that the CL technology and intelligence collection methodology would have greater potential and could be better utilized at a higher echelon in DoD. Accordingly, CG INSCOM offered to transfer CENTER LANE's assets and personnel to DIA. On 7 March 1985, a memorandum of agreement was concluded between DIA and INSCOM providing for the interim operational control of CL by DIA, and for the ultimate assimilation of CL assets and personnel into DIA's new SUN STREAK psychoenergetics program. CL personnel were transferred to DIA in FY 1986 to form the nucleus of the SUN STREAK effort. SECRET Approved For Release 2004/08/16 : CIA-RDP96-00789R001100020001-7
Fe arte Approved For Release 2o04oaiig: loja-RDFI96- -00789R001100020001-7 APPENDIX B Lisrartcalosemary—e “Human Use™ Issues FOIAB5 l. (S/NOFORN) In February 1979, the Army General Counsel determined that GRILL FLAME (GF) activities involved testing on human _subije , The urgeon General's Human Subjects Research Review Board reviewed the GF protocol and concluded that it represented technology transfer and validation of the technology transfer, rather than research or clinical investigation, and as such, GF activities did not require approval for human use. However, the Board expressed concerns that future Army follow-on work might be classified as research, and as such, plans should be considered to establish credible human use review procedures to oversee GF _FOIABS5 pri , the Under Secretary of the Army approved the continuation of GF activities. In October 1980, the DoD, DIA, and Army General Counsel jointly agreed that it would be prudent to obtain written approval from the Deputy Secretary of Defense to conduct GF activities. ACSI, DA concurrently initiated action to obtain Secretary of the Army approval to conduct GF activities. In September 1982, INSCOM GRILL FLAME activities ceased because of NFIP restrictions; INSCOM psychoenergetic activities were reinitiated in December 1982, under the INSCOM CENTER LANE Project (ICLP), an S&IA activity. Secretary or Under Secretary approval for GRILL FLAME/ICLP activities has been granted on 14 January 1981, 1 February 1982 and 1 September 1983, which were generally valid for one year. With the pending transfer of ICLP resources to DIA to become the new SUN STREAK Program, a DIA General Counsel decision in February 1985 designated SUN STREAK a "Human Use" program, determining that the Project involved "Experimentation on Human Subjects," and that relevant Human Use protocols did indeed apply to Project procedures and technologies. Conduct of the Project under Human Use regulations was subsequently approved on 13 March 1985 by the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense. 2. (U) Regulations governing "Experimentation on Human Subjects" are as follows: a. (U) 45 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 46, "Protection of Human Subjects" (Incl 1). b. (U) Procedure 13, DOD Directive 5240.1-R (Incl 2). SECRET Approved For Release 2004/08/16 : CIA-RDP96-00789R001100020001-7
Approved For Release 2004/0 BAR GR SIP PR 00789R001 100020001-7 APPENDIX C Psychological Test Descriptions l. The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI): Developed by S. R. Hathaway, Ph.D., and J. C. McKinley, M.D., The Psychological Corporation. The MMPI is designed to provide an objective assessment of some of the major personality characteristics that affect personal and social adjustment. The point of view determining the importance of a trait in this case is that of the clinical or personnel worker who wishes to assay those traits that are commonly characteristic of disabling psychological abnormality. The carefully constructed and cross-validated scales provide a means for measuring’ the personality status of literate adolescents and adults together with a basis for evaluating the acceptability and dependability of each test record. Nine scales were originally developed for clinical use of the inventory and were named for the abnormal conditions on which their construction was based. The scales were not expected to measure pure traits nor to represent discrete etiological or prognostic entities. Since they have been shown to have meaning within the normal range of behavior, these scales are now commonly referred to by their abbreviations--Hs (hypochondriasis), D (depression), Hy (Hysteria), Pd (psychopathic deviate), Mf (masculinity- femininity), -Pa (paranoia), Pt (psychasthenia) , Sc (schizophrenia), and Ma (hypomania)--or by their code numbers to avoid possibly misleading connotations. Many other scales have Subsequently been developed from the same items; Si (social introversion) is one that is commonly scored. There are also three validating scales: L (lie), F (validity), and K (correction). 2. Gordon Personal Profile - Inventory (GPI): Developed by Leonard V. Gordon, Ph.D., The Psychological Corporation. The GPI is companion instrument to the Gordon Personal Profile (GPP). It measures four additional traits, namely Cautiousness (C), Original Thinking (0), Personal Relations (P), and Vigor (V). The ,two instruments used together provide an economical coverage of eight important factors in the personality domain. Both have been found to be appropriate for use with high school, college, industrial, and general adult groups. 3. Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation - Behavior (FIRO - B): Developed by Will Schutz, Ph.D., Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc. The fundamental interpersonal dimensions of the FIRO Theory are; Inclusion (I), Control (C), and Affection (A) and are defined behaviorally as follows: I - The interpersonal need for inclusion is the need to establish Approved For Release 2004/08/16 : CIA-RDP96-00789R001100020001-7
r -* SEP yes Approved For Release noosa A’ RDP96-00789R001100020001-7 and maintain a satisfactory relationship with people with respect to interaction and association (both positive or negative). C - The interpersonal need for control is the need to establish and maintain a satisfactory relationship with people with respect to control and power. A - The interpersonal need for affection is the need to establish and maintain a Satisfactory relationship with others with respect to love and affection. 4, California Psychological Inventory (CPI): Developed by Harrison G. Gough, Ph.D., Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc. The CPI is intended primarily for use with "normal" (non-psychiatrically disturbed) subjects. Its scales are addressed to personality characteristics important for social living and social interaction, i.e., to variables that are woven into the fabric of everyday life. "Folk concepts" such as these are hypothesized to be relevant to the prediction and understanding of interpersonal behavior in any setting, culture, or circumstance. Thus, although the inventory has been found to have special utility in work with particular kinds of problems, e.g., delinquent and asSocial behavior, it can also provide information of value in regard to educational, vocational, familial, and many other issues. 5. Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (EPPS): Developed by Allen L. Edwards, Ph.D., University of Washington. The EPPS was designed primarily as an instrument for research and counseling purposes, to provide quick and convenient measures of a number of relatively independent normal personality variables. The statements in the EPPS and the variables that these statements purport to measure have their origin in a list of manifest needs presented by H. A. Murray and other noted psychologists. The names that have been assigned to the variables are those used by Murray. These 15 measurable personality variables are} achievement (ach), deference (def), order (ord), exhibition (exh), autonomy (aut), affiliation (aff), intraception (int), Ssuccorance (suc), dominance (dom), abasement (aba), nurturance (nur), change (chg), endurance (end), heterosexuality (het), and aggression (agg). In addition to the above 15 personality variables, the EPPS provides a measure of test consistency and a measure of profile stability. 6. Personal Orientation Inventory (POI): Developed by Everett L. Shostrom, Ph.D., Educational and Industrial Testing Service, San Diego, California. The profile on the POI shows the degree to which the subject's attitudes and values compare with those of self-actualizing people. A self-actualizing person is one who is more fully functioning and who lives a more enriched life than does the average person. Such a person is developing and utilizing his unique talents to the fullest extent. Approved For Release 2004/08/16 : CIA-RDP96-00789R001100020001-7
Approved For RALEEMMb 6 Dsn-RDP96-00789R001 100020001-7 wi Evaluator FReceDuRey SECRET Ort S HNRPOS PO —ELALUATION PROCEDURES 1. (S/NF/SS-2) Operational Phase: (S/NF/SS-2) The Program Manager will assess the value of the operational phase of the DRAGOON ABSORB/SUN STREAK program by requiring all data con- sumers (i.e., operational task originators} to furnish him with data ac- curacy and data utility assessments. Table 1 illustrates the general format and assessment scale (0-3) for this evaluation. Specific data categories may vary depending on the nature of the task or on specific objectives; however, the overall approach will remain the same. (S/NF/SS-2) The Program Manager will enter results of the accuracy and utility assessment into the project data base. He will make periodic reviews (quarterly) of this data to assess overall effectiveness. (S/NF/SS-2) The Program Manager, in coordination with the task originators and the Intelligence Community Task Coordinating Group, wit] develop an additional measure of program value. This measurement (overall program value) is designed to measure the net worth or total contribution of the task in relation to other tasks and to the overall intelligence mission. Data accuracy and utility may be high for a particular consumer, but the results may not have a significant overall impact. This “program value” scale is similar to the utility scale; however it is based on specific measures of over-all benefit. This value scale is as follows: Program Value Scale 0 - Little or no over-all program value 1 - Some program value (i.e., helped refine estimates) 2 - Moderate value (i.e., identified new data, narrowed down possibilities) 3 - High value (i.e., led to significant cost savings, identified critical high priority S&T or operational activities) 4 - Exceptional value (i.e., predicted major events/activities, located lost/missing resources or personnel). The value evaluation will be used in conjunction with other program evaluation parameters (accuracy, utility) for determining program accom- plishments and for defining future program directions. SECRET NOT RELEASABLE TO FOREIGN NATIONALS 3 Approved For Release 2004/08/16 : CIA-RDP96-00789R001100020001-7
(S) SUMMARY EVALUATION SHEET (U) (U) For the SUMS yr Heal Fat Reicapd 2004/hd bk CMe REGIME PARR RES 9802000 byl, accuracy of the submitted material, * ACCURACY Site Contact, Little, with Not Correspondence | Mixed Results Good = Excellent Unknown Arplicable 0 2 . 3 (S) Geographical locale descrip- tion (terrain, water, etc.) CI (S) Large-scale manmade elements (cities, buildings, silos, docks, railroad lines, airfields, etc.) CJ CJ (S) Small-scale manmade elements (antennas, computers, tanks, missiles, offices, etc.) (S) General tarpet ambience (re- search, production, adminis- CJ C tration, storage, troop move- ‘| CI oogdaa- oaqaad oaqaad OO OM C Cc - ments, naval activity, air C C) activity, weapons testing, etc.) (S) Relevant specific activities (nuclear testing, misstle firing, CBW storage, ELINT monitoring, etc, ) ‘s) Personality information (physical deacriptions actions, responsibilities, Cc) . C) Cc) Cc) | C) plans, etc.) _—7e ew we we B= ew w Be ws ow ew ow ow O 0 CJ C Cj 1 Cannot be de- 'S) Overall utility None Cc] Marginal CC] Useful | Very Useful CJ termined at this time C] (wv) Definitions for the accuracy scale: 0 - Little correspondence . + e+ + Self explanatory, 1 - Site contact with... - + ¢ - Mixture of correct and incorrect elements, but enough of the former to , mixed results . indicate source has probably accessed the target site, - GOO e «ee J Freellent + voted ForRelease 2004816 SCtadapBAs @RR8IRQH LANA PLY little incorrece informant ton, Taner 8 unique matchable elements and relatively 134935 | i * es © © ¢ + « © © Good correspondence with several c}ements matching, but some incorrect informetion,
Approved For Release 2004/08/16 : CIA-RDP96-00789R001100020001-7 SECRET 2. (S/NF/SS-2) Training and Operational Qualifying Phase: (C) There are two other aspects of this program that will require evalu- ation by the Program Manager or by his representative; the basic training phase and the operational qualifying (or operational training) phase. (S/NF/SS-2) The basic training phase consists of a large variety of easy-to-verify training tasks that are designed for various stages of proficiency. Overall evaluations will be based on the “accuracy scale" used for operational projects and on an additional quantitative procedure. The accuracy scale will permit assessment of an individual's progress through the six training stages. The quantitative procedure (i.e., concept/element analysis) will allow assessments of degree of accuracy and will provide the basis for determining what general classes of operational projects a viewer can best perforn. (S/NF/SS-2) The operational qualifying phase follows satisfactory completion of the training phase. This phase consists of tasks that simulate operational projects but differ in that ground truth can be readily determined, and there are no operational consumers. The main purpose of this phase is to systematically quantify the operational readiness of each viewer for a wide variety of potential operational projects. Data from this phase will also help identify the best types of operational tasks for remote viewing (RV) applications. (S/NF/SS-2) Each RV source will perform several hundred operational qualifying tasks per year. These tasks will include representative examples from DIA's intelligence production codes and from other potential operational requirements. Evaluation will be performed by the Program Manager or his representative and will be based on the accuracy scale used for operational projects. In addition, accurate estimates of operational reliability and utility will be made using quantitative methods (i.e., concept/element analysis, pattern evaluation). These evaluation procedures will require extensive use of a dedicated data base management system for storing large amounts of information and for performing appropriate analyses. (S/NF/SS-2) It is anticipated that a limited operational capability will be achieved by early to mid 1987. Some operational projects will be initiated in FY 1986; however, the type of task accepted will depend on the nature of the proposed task and on capability levels of available RV sources. SECRET NOT RELEASABLE TO FOREIGN NATIONALS ) Approved For Release 2004/08/16 : CIA-RDP96-00789R001100020001-7
ne Approved For Release SECRET varcozoo: 100020001-7 TARGETS TRAINING REPORT a aa A APPENDIX fe 5 CCASSESS Ap PCFIAITH CUS 1. (S/SK/WNINTEL) There are three classes of Remote Viewing (RV) training used in that portion of the in-house training. which was modeled after the SRI-I subcontractor program. These classes deal with feedback requirements during the RV session, control of interviewer patter, trainee skill development, and motivation. These three classes (A, B, and C) are discussed below.* 2. (S/SK/WNINTEL) CLASS C: The ,majority of the training sessions for novice trainees are Class C. During this phase, the source trainee must learn to differentiate between emerging target relevant perceptions and imaginative overlay. To assist the trainee in this learning, immediate feedback is provided during the session. The interviewer is provided with a feedback package which may contain a map, photographs, and/or a narrative description of the target. During Class C sessions the interviewer provides the trainee with immediate feedback for each element of data he provides, with the exception that negative feedback is not given. Should the trainee state an element of information that appears incorrect, the interviewer remains silent. Feedback, in order to prevent inadvertent cuing (interviewer overlay), is in the form of very specific statements made by the interviewer. These statements and their definitions are as follows: Correct (C) This indicates that the information is correct in context with the site location, but is not sufficient to end the session. *NOTE: The use herein of the terms Class A, B, or C differs from the definition applied and published by SRI-I for Class A, B, or C Coordinate Remote Viewing (CRV). SECRET Approved For Release 2004/08/16 : CIA-RDP96-00789R001100020001-7
Approved For Release ort ER Eel corsoncot 100020001-7 Probably Correct (PC) This statement means that the Interviewer, having limited information about the target, though he cannot be absolutely sure, believes that the information provided is correct. Near _(N) This indicates that the information provided is not an element of the specific site, but is correct for the immediate surrounding area. Can't Feedback (CFB) This statement indicates that, due to limited information about the target, the interviewer cannot make a judgment as to the correctness of the data. It means neither correct nor incorrect. Site (S) This indicates the site has been correctly named for the specific stage being trained (manmade structure for Stage 1, bridge for Stage III, etc.). "Site" indicates that the sdssion is completed. During the session the trainee writes the abbreviation (see above) of the feedback next to the data. This allows the trainee to review the correct elements and produce a summary which describes the site. The training session continues until the interviewer responds with the feedback of Site. 3. (S/SK/WNINTEL) CLASS B: Once a trainee begins to demonstrate his ability to reliably distinguish imaginative overlay and report target relevant data elements, feedback is withdrawn. In Class B training sessions the interviewer knows what target he desires the trainee to describe but does not provide the trainee with any direct feedback during the course of the session. This process develops the trainee's ability to internalize his awareness of relevant (correct) versus extraneous (incorrect ) cognitive structures (mental perceptions). During Class B sessions the interview may ask the trainee to elaborate on specific elements of data provided, thereby guiding the trainee to describe specjfic areas of the target. The interviewer is only permitted to ask the trainee to elaborate on specific elements already reported by the trainee. The interviewer may not introduce new elements into the session (cue the source) in an attempt to encourage the trainee to properly describe the site. Class B sessions are especially helpful in developing refined skills in the trainee. For example, when the interviewer knows that a particular target area within a site may be of interest (i.e., a specific room in a building), he can guide the trainee's attention to that area by asking the trainee to elaborate on specific elements of data which the interviewer knows to pertain to the area of interest. With practice in Class B, the trainee soon learns to control his own perceptual faculties, a necessary step for further training and operational intelligence collection. SECRET Approved For Release 2004/08/16 : CIA-RDP96-00789R001100020001-7
OCLUNE | Approved For Release 2004/08/16 : CIA-RDP96-00789R001100020001-7 4. (S/SK/WNINTEL) CLASS A: Class A training is similar to what the R&D community refers to as a "double blind" experiment. The purposes for Class A training and for R&D double blind experiments differ however. The RAD community uses double blind experimental protocols to test a variable under controlled conditions. Class A training 1s not a test for the trainee, but a process whereby the source learns to function with the interviewer in a team effort to acquire and describe information concerning a target of interest. In Class A, both the trainee and the interviewer are provided no information (double blind) concerning the site to be described during the session. Rather than trying to please the interviewer with his descriptions, the trainee is motivated to work with the interviewer in producing valid information about the site of interest. This motivational difference is critical in forcing the trainee to use his RV ability to acquire and describe site dependent information as opposed’ to interviewer dependent telepathic data (in an attempt to please the interviewer) or data RVed from the feedback package (in an attempt to receive external positive reinforcement from the interviewer, i.e., Correct, Probably Correct, and/or Site). Working as a team in a Class A session, the interviewer and source trainee combine their aptitudes (the interviewer with his directive, analytic skill and the trainee with his exploratory, perceptual ability) to report information of interest about the designated target. 5. (S/SK/WNINTEL) The three classes of RV training (A, B, and C) are interdependent. Each is designed to deal with separate learning requirements in the acquisition of RV skills. It must be remembered that the concept of classes herein applies to training. Operational application of RV requires its own unigue, specifically designed feedback requirements and task dependent control of interviewer/source interaction. Trainee sources also require operational training beyond the narrow confines of the SRI-I subcontractor modeled training program before they can be expected to produce dependable, timely intelligence information. SECRET Approved For Release 2004/08/16 : CIA-RDP96-00789R001100020001-7