COMMENTS ON NE DIVISION REPLY TO OUR REPORT

Document Type: 
Collection: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
CIA-RDP62-01094R000300060014-5
Release Decision: 
RIPPUB
Original Classification: 
S
Document Page Count: 
2
Document Creation Date: 
November 17, 2016
Document Release Date: 
January 20, 1999
Sequence Number: 
14
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
September 30, 1960
Content Type: 
MFR
File: 
AttachmentSize
PDF icon CIA-RDP62-01094R000300060014-5.pdf75.48 KB
Body: 
Approved For Release 20OW09/06 : GI-A-R[ 094R00030006O .4-5 30 September 1960 SUBJECT: Comments on NE Division Reply to Our Report 1. With the exception of closing or drastically reducing Project I don't feel very strongly about any of the NE Division nonconcurrences. I believe some of the nonconcurrences are based on simple misunderstanding and that NE might go along with our suggestions if they were properly understood. Examples of misunderstandings are the following: a. We recommended that young junior grade officers would 25X1A6a benefit by a tour at an isolated post like We intended that these young officers be in addition to the more mature Chief of Base. NE apparently misunderstood and disapproved on the grounds that a young fellow could not manage such a base alone. b. We recommended that young case officers be assigned to reports duty at Headquarters as part of their training before being sent abroad. I had intended that a young officer so assigned would spend at least a year or two on the reports job. NE misunderstood this recommendation and disapproved on grounds that the young case officer would not benefit by a brief reports assignment. 2. In several places NE refused to consider our recommendations, simply because they called for stopping some activities which we consider marginal. Examples of this are our recommendations to close In both cases NE oesn't really justify the activities, it simply expresses the hope that it will prove valuable in the future. 3. NE also refuses to consider consolidating the work and budgets 25X1A6a of the two fairly senior men it maintains in _ I had two objections 25X1A6a to the setup: a. There isn't enough work for one man much less two and only one of the two men is charged against the NE budget, the other one being carried by WE. I would not be disposed to fight if NE insists on maintaining two men, but certainly both of them should be charged against NE's budget. 11. It is rather pointless for me to comment on NE's blanket rejections of our recommendations on In its reply NE answered none of our comments and criticisms. I understand that the Director Approved For Release 2000/09/06 - 62-01094R000300060014-5 Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP62-01094R000300060014-5 25X1A2dl favors retaininE~ My objection is not so much to the concept of as to the gross inefficient and lavish extrava ances with whit 1 s operated. I believe the could be 25X1A2d1 cut at least two-thirds without seriously effecting any operational benefits which we might in the future hope to obtain from the foreign representatives. 2 Approved For Release 2000/09/06 : CIA-RDP62-01094R000300060014-5