{ "id": "RL32508", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "RL32508", "active": false, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 306108, "date": "2005-02-22", "retrieved": "2016-04-07T19:52:13.672029", "title": "Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) Programs: Issues for Congress", "summary": "Intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) functions are principal elements of U.S.\ndefense\ncapabilities, and include a wide variety of systems for acquiring and processing information needed\nby national security decisionmakers and military commanders. ISR systems range in size from\nhand-held devices to orbiting satellites. Some collect basic information for a wide range of\nanalytical products; others are designed to acquire data for specific weapons systems. Some are\n\"national\" systems intended primarily to collect information of interest to Washington-area agencies;\nothers are \"tactical\" systems intended to support military commanders on the battlefield. \nCollectively, they account for a major portion of U.S. intelligence spending that, according to media\nestimates, amounts to some $40 billion annually. \n For some time Congress has expressed concern about the costs and management of ISR\nprograms. With minor exceptions, ISR acquisition has been coordinated by the Defense Department\nand the Intelligence Community. Although there are long-existing staff mechanisms for reviewing\nand coordinating ISR programs in the context of the annual budget submissions, many in Congress\nbelieve that existing procedures have not avoided duplication of effort, excessive costs, and gaps in\ncoverage. Examples that some observers cite are separate efforts to acquire a new generation of\nreconnaissance satellites and a high altitude unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) known as Global Hawk.\nBoth systems acquire some of the same sorts of information and serve similar customers, but they\nare acquired in distinctly different ways; moreover, in both cases procurement efforts have been\nbeset by increasing costs and schedule delays. \n Recently enacted statutes mandate better integration of ISR capabilities and require that the\nDefense Department prepare a roadmap to guide the development and integration of ISR capabilities\nover the next fifteen years. An effective roadmap, if developed, could potentially ensure more\ncomprehensive coverage of targets and save considerable sums of money. To establish responsibility\nfor an Intelligence Community-wide effort, the 9/11 Commission recommended that a new position\nof Director of National Intelligence be established to manage the national intelligence program (but\nnot joint military and tactical intelligence programs, which would continue to be managed by the\nDefense Department). This position was included, after extended debate, in the Intelligence Reform\nand Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 ( P.L. 108-458 ) that was approved by the President on\nDecember 17, 2004. The implications of this legislation for ISR programs are as yet uncertain, but\nCongress may seek to assess the effectiveness of the statute in addressing long-existing concerns\nwith ISR programs. This report will be updated as circumstances warrant.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/RL32508", "sha1": "7d06827f596aa91c6d1b5c34b5df9033c4dd8be7", "filename": "files/20050222_RL32508_7d06827f596aa91c6d1b5c34b5df9033c4dd8be7.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL32508", "sha1": "de7e126a21fd0641aa60052530fdb38a3b3221c1", "filename": "files/20050222_RL32508_de7e126a21fd0641aa60052530fdb38a3b3221c1.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs5972/", "id": "RL32508 2004-08-04", "date": "2004-08-04", "retrieved": "2005-06-11T21:34:35", "title": "Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) Programs: Issues for Congress", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20040804_RL32508_3cff28418a09d60fdeb674194bce25dcbc28dfc7.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20040804_RL32508_3cff28418a09d60fdeb674194bce25dcbc28dfc7.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Intelligence activities", "name": "Intelligence activities" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Reconnaissance satellites - U.S.", "name": "Reconnaissance satellites - U.S." }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Intelligence services - U.S. Department of Defense", "name": "Intelligence services - U.S. Department of Defense" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Weapons systems", "name": "Weapons systems" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Space activities", "name": "Space activities" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc817164/", "id": "RL32508_2004Jul30", "date": "2004-07-30", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) Programs: Congressional Oversight Issues", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20040730_RL32508_d035907bddda82906791f51568f00ea8535abc84.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20040730_RL32508_d035907bddda82906791f51568f00ea8535abc84.html" } ], "topics": [] } ], "topics": [ "Intelligence and National Security", "National Defense" ] }