-.1% K-T wed For Release 2000/08/0 96-00798RO01 100200004-5 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY US ARMY INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY COMMAND FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, MARYLAND 20755 IAOPS-H-S INSCOM GRILL FLAME PROJECT PROTOCOL 1. (S/NOFORN) GENERAL: I June 1981 This protocol contains the procedure for INSCOM GRILL FLAME Project (IGFP) sponsored remote viewing. It is in effect for the period required to accomplish the scope of work. Remote viewing (RV) is an intellectual process by which an individual perceives characteristics of a designated.target remote in space and/or time from that individual. RV does not involve any electronic sensing devices at or focused at the target site, nor-does it involve classical photo interpretation of photographs obtained from overhead or oblique means. The individual performing RV (the remote viewer) is provided with a unique identi- fier to allow him to focus his attention on the designated target. This identifier may be stationary map coordinates, a specific structure, an identi- fiable vehicle (aircraft tail number) or a specific individual (name, place of birth, age, and/or photograph). The task of the remote viewer is to drsr~b?. designated aspects of the specified target. The task is achievable No drugs or hypnosis will be used in this RV protocol. 2. (S/NOFORN) MILITARY OBJECTIVE: It is the objective of this protocol to standardize the process of remote viewing so that it may become an established task in the spectrum of intclli- gence and information gathering functions and for target acquisition applications. 3. (S/NOFORN) MILITARY APPLICATIONS: Remote viewing can be used to: (1) target on key enemy military individuals from covert agents to key battle commanders; (2) detect 'the change in state of military units; (3) monitor hostile military LOCs. US Army personnel units, materiel and opera-Lions are vulnerable to hostile RV. Countermeasures must be devised to eliminate or reduce this vulnerability. 4. (S/NOFORN) APPROVAL HISTORY: The Commander, US Army Materiel Development and Readiness Command (DARCOM) approved, in principle, the US Army Materiel Systems Analysis Activity (AMSAA) involvement in project GRILL FLAME in April 1978. In May 1970, the Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence (ACSI) accepted lead responsibility for GRILL FLAME applications. Effective 14 January 1981, by approval of Under Secretary of Army, INSCOM became the only active operational GRILL FLAME element in the Army. Program managemcnt for GRILL FLAME was transferred to Commander, INSCOM effective 11 February 1981. OACSI, DAMI-ISH remains the Army focal point for policy matters and interface aL the national level. Overall DoD responsibility resides with the Deronsc Intelligence Agency (DIA). GR~4L CLASSI DECtASSIP(-=6 SECRET OR REVIEW ON BOT FLELEASABLE TO FOREIGN NATIONM$NDED BY - REASON Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788RO01 100200004-5 Approved For Release 2000&ZIKIRDP96-00768 ROO 1100200004-5 5. (S/NOFORN) DEFINITIONS: a. Remote Viewim-210:.. An intellectual process by which a person perceives characteristics of a location remote from that person. It does not involve any electronic sensing devices at or focused at the target nor does it involve classical photo interpretation of' photographs obtained from overhead or oblique means. b. -Rem_o_te_,.Vicwing Session: A single attempt by a remote viewer to perceive and report characteristics of a designated target. c. Remote Viewcr: The individual who performs remote viewing. d. Interviewer: The individual. who interacts with the remote viewer before, during, and after the RV session. o. f.E sect ±_Q2ksL-. The individual who interacts with outside agencies. f. P~r~;,ct Operations Officer: The individual who controls utilization of RV assets. g. L~~.~,ct_jra_LrjiiqZ~onc~p - Officer: The individual who trains personnel to do RV and develops operational concepts for application by the operations officer. h. Proj~p~ctrMlanaqer: The individual who coordinates project activities. i. Project Officer: The overall, responsible individual for all aspects of the project. j~LestLoL: A requestor is an Army or non j. ~ec -Army consumer or producer agency who initiates and submits a task (See TAB A for Tasking Flow Chart). k. Task: A task is an operational request for information, essential elements of intelligence or target requirement. 1. Specific task, which may be in the form of a coordinate, picture of an object, or drawing, etc. 6. (S/NOFORN) PROCEDURE: a. 2~rain.Ln_q: To provide a framework for standardizing the, task of RV) a series.of training sessions will be conducted. The elements of a training session are: (1) target selection; (2) remote viewer session preliminaries; (3) remote viewing session, and (4) post-session analysis. The procedure.will be described using geographic coordinates as the remote target identifier. 'ON"' E C t~ E T Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788RO01 100200004-5 Approved For Release 20001ONF-7lififf DP 6-00788RO01 100200004-5 (1) Target Selection: Training targets are developed in response to operational.needs.,.The basic training package includes the use of geographical coordinates as well as the modifications outlined in paragraph 7 below. In the case of geographical coordinates, a target pool is constructed by an individual not.involved in interviewing or remote viewing. A target pool.consists of a group of similar sealed envelopes which designate a specific target by geo- graphic coordinate. Prior to the beginning of a session, an envelope is randomly selected from this target pool by the interviewer. At this time, only the coordinate is provided the interviewer who then reads the coordinate to the remote viewer at the beginning of the session. Other information available concerning the 'target is revealed only after the session during the post-session analysis. A specific target is presented only once to the remote viewer. (2) Remote Viewer Session Preliminaries: Before a first RV session is scheduled, the remote viewer is oriented to the procedure to be followed by the interviewer. The remote viewer needs to understand that he or she should state raw perceptions; experience has shownl that specific definitions are quite often wrong while the initial raw perception tends to be correct. Remote viewers are always encouraged to express their feelings and ideas for enhancing all aspects of the RV process. (3) Remote Viewina Session: During the 30-60 minutes prior to the agreed-upon start time of a session, the interviewer offers some encouragement to the remote viewer in the manner of a coach giving a pep talk to his team. During the 15 minutes immediately before the session the remote viewer and interviewer are generally silent. Experience has shown (unpublished data) t.hat this "quiet time" enhances the RV process. During the 15 minutes the remote viewer and the interviewer function as a team. The interviewer provides encouragement with words of reassurance that the task is, in fact, possible. At no time is the session conducted by the remote viewer in the absence of all other persons. If the remote viewer does not have any immediate sensory images, the interviewer applies no pressure. Rather, the interviewer reassures the remote viewer that they have all the time in the.world. When the remote viewer has an image, experience.suggesLs (unpublished data) that the remote viewer often intellectually transports himself or herself to the remote target site. The interviewer, in conversation with the remote viewerg may then suggest that -the remote viewer intellectually.move around at the site and describe the site more fully (e.g., buildings, terrain features, people, activities, machinery, etc). If it appears to the interviewer that the images are in some way contradictory or inconsistent, the interviewer may then.attempL clarification. by asking questions in order to verify what the remote viewer first described. 3 ornna. Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788RO01 100200004-5 Approved For Release 200C."-% monm P96-00788RO01 100200004-5 Y -0 UIRL'I" The RV session is tape-recorded and pen and paper are available for the remote viewer to sketch his perceptions. Experience has shownl that some remote viewers prefer to combine written and oral descriptions, while some prefer to work sequentially, The average RV session is approximately 30 minutes and never exceeds 60 minutes, not to include drawings, etc. (4) Post-Session 8p2lys',Ls: After the RV session is over, the remote viewer and int iewer obtain specific information.about the target and compare their session results with this data. The remote viewer and the interviewer discuss the session results. The purpose of -this post-session analysis is to provide the remote viewer with the satisfaction of knowing how well he or she did. b. 2LE, ..Ea~~ion~i: The elements of an operational remote viewing session, in general, are similar to the clements of the training remote viewing session. The sequence consists.of the following: (1) target selection; (2) remote viewing session preliminaries;' (3) the remote viewing secssion; and, (4) post-session analysis and reporting. (1) Tarqot Selection,: Target selection or tasking is initiated by a requestor through USA INSCOM staff where it is subsequently passed to the INSCOM, ADCSOPS-HUMINT, Special Actions (SA) B.ranch. Within SA, the -task is logged by the operations officer and assigned to a project analyst. The project analyst working with the requestor creates the specific task EEI. Subsequently, the project analyst requests the operations officer schedule RV sessions against the task. (2) Remote Viewiag S~n a~i~rj~rR~iminaries: This aspect consists of two phases: (aTproject analyst-interview"e'-'r-'p"'-r'-ep-'a-ratiot-i; and (b) interviewer- remote viewer preparation. (a) Project Analyst-Interviewer P 'reparation: Prior to a session the project analyst and the interviewer discuss the purpose of the session, specific EEI required, line of questioning most appropriate for successful mission accomplishment, and whether the session will be monitored. (b) Interviewer-Remote Viewer PrgpA~atiqn: This phase of the sequence is similar to that used in a training RV session. The remote viewer is oriented to the procedure to be Followed by-the interviewer; reminded that he/she should state raw perceptions; and, encouraged to express their feelings and ideas for enhancing all aspects of the remote viewing process. (3) Remote VievigR Se!ls:L n: This phase of the sequence is nearly identical to the training RV session with the exception of the following: (a) The project analyst and/or the requestor may monitor the RV session from the control room and provide on-line guidance to the interviewer. 4 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788RO01 100200004-5 Approved For Release 20oofiAdO111&A.RDP96.00798RO01 100200004-5 (b) The project analyst-and/or the requestor.may require drawings of specified descriptions, and may provide posL-session debriefing/analytic guidance. (4) Post-Session Lija~I.L~s: Upon conclusion of the remote viewing session, the i rview, in accordance with guidance received from the.project analyst, discusses the session results with the remote viewer. The purpose of this discussion is to provide the.RVer with feedback in the form of positive reinforcement concerning his/her ability during the session. However, it should be noted t'hat due to the tasking constraints placed upon the interviewer by the project analyst or operations officer there may be no post-session analysis feedback to the RVer. 7. (S/NOFORN) VARIATIONS IN PROCEDURE FOR RV TRAINING: a- The foregoing has focused on the use of coordinates to obtain.from a remote viewer the description of that site. Another approach to the same goal is to use a person in place of a coordinate. For example, the remote viewer is provided some personal information and then proceeds to describe the location of the individual. Thus, the individual serves as a beacon to locate the target by RV. To standardize this approach, the procedure described in paragraph 6 is modif ied. b. The elements of this procedure.consist of: (1) target selection (2) remote viewer session preliminaries; (3) activity of person who serves as beacon; (4) remote viewing session; and (5) pbsL-session analysis. (1) Target Selection: A target pool is selected by an individual not involved in interviewing or remote viewing. The targets chosen will be distinctive, to include more than one example of each. This precludes the remote viewer from eliminating a target because one example was used before. The remote viewer is informed that the target pool consists of similar as well as different typos of targets. All other aspects of the target selection element of the procedure remain the same. (2) Remote Viewer.Session Preliminaries: This element is identical to that of the basic RV procedure. (3) -Activity of Person Who Serves as Beacon: At the beginning of the RV session, tl-~e__remotc viewer and interviewer are given one or more items of biographical information or may even meet briefly, for 3-5 minutes, the-.indivi- dual serving as the beacon.. If the latter is the case, the beacon.individual departs the meeting and obtains the target. This procedure eliminates the possibility..of-the beacon individual divulging any hint of the target. The beacon individual travels to the target, arriving there at the previously specified time. He or she then interacts with the site for the predetermined length of time of the RV session. (4) Remote Viewinq Ses: This element is identical to that of the basic RV procedure. Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788RO01 100200004-5 ornnrrL Approved For Release 200070561EURDP96-00768 ROO 1100200004-5 (5) ~ Post-Session LrIalysis: This element is identical to that of the basic RV procedure. 8. (S/NGVORN) SCOPE OF TARGETS FOR REMOTE VIEWING: USAINSCOM sponsored RV will exclude US, allied, or neutral nation's citizens as targets excepL when expressly authorized by appropriate legal authority. 9. (S/NOFORN) PERFORMING ORGANIZATION: USAINSCOM is the performing organiza- tion. 10. (S/NOFORN). PROJECTED MAXIMUM NUMBER OF REMOTE VIEWERS AND INTERVIEWERS: (Information clas-sified beyond the scope of this paper.) . 11. (S/NOFORN) SELECTION OF REMOTE VIEWERS AND INTERVIEWERS: a. Historical Perspective: In December 197B and January 1979 two hundred and fifty-one INSCOM personnel. in the greater Baltimore/Washington, D.C. area were considered for participation in the IGFP. These two hundred and fifty-one indivi- duals were experienced in the intelligence disciplines of SIGINT, PHOTINT and HUMINT and represented more than eight units/organizations within INSCOM. Of the two hundred and fifty-one individuals considercd~ one hundred and seventeen were interviewed by IGFP management personnel under the guise of a 1'surveyll to determine attitudes about the possible use of psychoenergetic phenomena (parapsychology) in the intelligencelfield. The large difference between number considered and number actually interviewed was due to the following elimination factors applied by IGFP personnel. (1) Commander's evaluation. (2) Retainability at least 20 months. (3) Health. (4) Not readily available (programmed TDY, schools, etc.). During the selection process, 1GFP management personnel were looking for individuals who were open minded, adventurous,.above average intelligence, mature and stable, Ivartistic" in character and personality, successful, well thought of by self and co-workers, articulateg sensitive, and had an ability to "in-flow" data. These characteristics were provided by Stanford Research Institute (SRI) International, Monlo Park, CA. SRI personnel stated essentially that no definite profile has been established, but that their experience has shown that successful subjects (Remote Viewers) normally possess some of these characteristics. During Lhe-interview phase of the selection-process consideration was also given to individuals who related their own previous psychoenergetic experiences. Individuals who had objections to the military use of psychoenergetics were not considered for final selection for the IGFP. Additionally, individuals who 6 --ormiror OLURL: - Approved For Release 2000108107 : CIA-RDP96-00788RO01 100200004-5 Approved For Release 200n/n0r7"-1ViT2QP96 -00788 ROO 1100200004-5 ~ - LURL I displayed an unreasonable enthusiasm for Psychoenergetics, occult fanatics and mystical zealots, were not considered.for final selection. Of the 117 individuals interviewed, one refused to talk about psychoenergetics at all, three thought that most of what they had heard was nonsense or trickery,, three were opposed to the investigation of psychic phenomena on religious grounds, and 110 had favorable opinions towards psychoenergetics and the possible use of psychic phenomena in the military. With 94.10' of the people interviewed showing favorable attitudes for the IGFP, it was obvious that further screening was necessary to reduce.this number to a manageable amount. IGFP screened the interviewees to ensure equal participation across the intelligence fields of' SlGINT,-PHOTINT and HUMINT, and after an extensive review of the interviews, 15 individuals were selected as prime candidates. However, it was the opinion of IGFP personnel that approximately 30-35 individuals possessed the requisite potentials desired for the IGFP. b. Current Activities: After over a year oF work in IGFP, participants were tested by the INSCOM Command Psychologist in an attempt to determine a suitable profile by which further participants could be identified. The, tests administered were: (1) Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (2) Gordon Personal Profile Inventory (3) Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation-Behavior (FIRO-B) (4) California Psycholigical Inventory (5) Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (6) Personal Orientation Inventory For the most part, the group presented as emotionally stable with no marked trends. There does appear to be an interesting similarity in defensive style, a tending toward artistic, aesthetic, cultural interests, and an.introversive style of emotional expression. From these test results the Command Psychologist has constructed a test that may be used.as an initial screening tool in the selection of new IGFP participants. Plans are to administer this-test to populations such as the, MI Officer's Advance Course at Fort HuachUca, Arizona. Individuals who score within parameters specified by the Command Psychologist would then receive personal interview with IGFP management personnel. From these interviews new IGFP participants would be selected. 12. (S/NOFORN) '' REPLICATION OF THE-RV PROCESS: For each participant, the maximum number of RV sessions will be two per day and no more than three per week. 13. (S/NOFORN) JUDGING: a. IL2LI!1q: Sessions will be judged using the following Target Correlation Chart: ~'l NLVAIL I Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788RO01 100200004-5 Approved For Release 2000/08GLJANBDP96-OO788 ROO 1100200004-5 TARGET CORRELATION CHART (TCC)* ASSIGNED VALUE DESCRIPTION RATING -1 Absolutely no target correlation. None (0010') 2 Drawings, narrative, and feedback reaction Low (150/0') have minimal target correlation. 3 Increased,target correlation, identity of Low-Moderate target could not be determined. (30'1'0') 4 Many target correlation factors readily Moderate 0') recognizable. Target identity possibilities (50/0 narrowed. 5-K* RV data shows unmistakable correlation to the target. Target possibilities can now be typified. 6 Little or no extraneous RV data present. Target identity can be readily matched. 7 Correct naming of the target. Moderate-High (70','a') High (80"o') Direct Hit 0') (10010 Target Correlation Chart (TCC) was established not to prove or disprove Remote.Viewing (RV). Rather, it was dealgaed to measure RV learning trends and to provide Project Management personnel a readily available management tool. ** Current state-of-the-art indicates this level of expertise is the norm for an experienced Remote Viewer. b. Operations: Sessions will be judged in relation to intelligence usefulness by the requesting agency. 14. (S/NOFORN) 'CONFIDENTIALITY- Individuals performing as remote viewers and interviewers under the USAINSCOM GRILL FLAME program will not be identified outside of their parent organization without their prior consent,.and-they will be referred to in, project records only by an alpha-numeric designator. Products of remote viewers and interviewers such as tapes, drawings, transcripts, rosters, or other materials which might reveal the identity of the remote viewer will be coded to assure the protection of their identity. 15. (S/NOFORN) PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT: RV.sessions will be conducted,in an ordinary room at ambient LeMpOratUre andflumidity during the normal waking flours of the participants. The only limitations on these parameters will be security from electronic eavesdropping and elimination of ordinary distracting noises such as a radio and office machinery. Approved For Release 2000108107 : CIA-RDP96-00788RO01 100200004-5 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788RO01 100200004-5 TAB A Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788RO01 100200004-5 Approved For Releasw 2-MOMM7 rcci*Ll 01100200004-5 DA, ACSI-ISH DA,C C - POLI ~ ~EJRS POLICY MATTERS Y [ NON-ARMY REQUESTOR DCSOPS INSCOM INTELLIGENCE REVIEW COMMITTEE ADCSOPS HUMINT ARMY REQUESTOR IGFP SPECIAL ACTIONS BRANCH OPNS OFCR RV IV G RULL FLAMM ul 1IL-u- 140T RUZASABLE TOFOLLIGN NATI01i= Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788RO01 100200004-5