POSITION OF THE DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE GOVERNMENT HIERARCHY

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP66B00403R000400260016-1
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 6
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 1, 2004
• Sequence Number: 16
• Publication Date: October 18, 1961
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Release 2 2/ urn" P 0IY0400260016-1
18 OCT 1961
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Central Intelligence
SUBJECT: Position of the Director of Central Intelligence
in the Governmental Hierarchy
1. This memorandum contains a recommendation submitted
for approval of the Director of Central Intelligence. Such recom-
mendation is contained in paragraph 6.
2. I suggest that this would be an appropriate time for you
to consider action to adjust the position of the Director of Central
Intelligence in the over-all Government structure. I have reference
solely to the relative placement of the Director of Central Intelligence
on the roll of Federal executives.
3. It is unnecessary for me to attempt to discuss the
importance of the role of the Director of Central Intelligence and
his intimate relationship with the President, the National Security
Council, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and others. With a new
Director of Central Intelligence already selected by the President,
any recommendations that you might have would be free from personal
connotations.
4. The basic statute establishing relative positions is the
Federal Executive Pay Act of 1956 (FEPA). There has been no
general amendment to that Act nor have the salary scales established
therein been adjusted. On the other hand, there have been items of
legislation which have changed relative positions in certain cases.
Approved For Release 202/
0 0400260016-1
j)
 Approved For Releas R4/'I
B E2000400260016-1
For example, the Director of ICA was in the same category as the
Director of Central Intelligence (Category IV of FEPA) but was shifted
upward to a rank of Under Secretary of State in Category iI and the
new Administrator of AID is placed in Category II. Further, there
have been several salary increases in the Government generally as
well as in the Foreign Service and the Military pay structures which
contributed substantially to an imbalance of FEPA salaries within the
already out of balance total Government compensation structure. For
ready reference there is attached as Appendix "A" a compilation of
pay groups beginning at $20, 000 per annum. I have indicated within
each salary group the FEPA categories.
5. Recognizing that compensation is not the sole measure of
a Federal official's position in the hierarchy as to either prestige,
responsibility or authority, nevertheless, his relative placement among
Federal executives has significance. While I have set up the various
pay groups for comparison purposes on the basis of annual compensation,
I do not believe it appropriate that an approach to the adjustment of the
Director of Central Intelligence's position should be done on a dollar
basis. As indicated previously, salary increases for the Military and
for Foreign Service have been enacted but FEPA remains the basic
statute in which the relative positions of Federal executives are
established. There have been several studies concerning revision of
executive pay scales and it is certain the Administration will be making
recommendations on this subject to the Congress in the coming year.
It is to be assumed that whatever action is taken will establish a proper
level of compensation for Federal executives but the specific amount
of that compensation is not the issue in adjusting the position of the
Director of Central Intelligence. Therefore, the basic approach should
be to place the Director of Central Intelligence's position in the proper
category of FEPA relative to other Federal executives.
6. Although there has been one position equated to Category I
of FEPA other than the 10 cabinet officers, i.e., the Director of the
Office of Emergency Planning (formerly Director of OCDM), it is not
believed appropriate or desirable that the Director of Central Intelligence
should be so placed. A review of Categories II and III would indicate
the Director should be placed in Category II which includes the Under
Secretary of State and Deputy Secretary of Defense. Legislation
enacted since 1956 has placed in that category the Administrator of
Approved For Release 20
/1 T- P6' I b46 400260016-1
fi ~.~_
MIR
 Approved For Release 2004112/15` CIA-RDP66B00403RO00400260016-1
NASA, the Director of Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, and
the Administrator of AID. It is interesting to note that in 1957 the
Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission was placed in Category
II just a year before Mr. McCone was nominated to that position.
Therefore, it is recommended that you approve action being taken
to explore placement of the position of the Director of Central
Intelligence in Category II and placement of the position of the
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence in Category III.
7. There remains for consideration the question of how to
accomplish this. Certainly considerable exploratory work should be
done before submission of appropriate legislation to the Bureau of the
Budget under the routine process,
a. The normal method would be to draw up an
amendment to the existing legislation, i. e., FEPA.
However, this has definite drawbacks in that it would
throw consideration of the proposed legislation into
the Post Office and Civil Service Committees and
would tend to open Pandora's box to other agencies
and individuals seeking adjustments.
b. Another possibility would be to insert appropriate
provisions in other proposed legislation to be considered
by the Armed Services Committees. This could be
explored carefully with the Department of Defense.
c. A third method would be to make provision for
this adjustment in other necessary legislation directly
relating to CIA and. thus having it considered by the two
Armed Services Committees. There are some minor
administrative amendments which are desirable and
which could be used as a vehicle for this.
8. The various methods outlined above should be quietly
explored while other spadework is going forward which should include
discussions with General Taylor and possibly the Chairmen of the two
Armed Services Committees. It is known, for example, that Senator
Russell was surprised at learning the low rate of pay received by the
Director of Central Intelligence upon reading the recent announcements
concerning the appointment of Mr. McCone. It is believed Senator
Russell would strongly support an upward adjustment as would Mr.
Vinson.
Approved For Release 20041.12/15'.: D64'f.t)P66BOO4O3ROb0400260016-1
 Approved For Release 2004f F :fffffq p6 3
9. If the Administration presents in the next session of
Congress a general plan for adjustments of salaries for Federal
executives it is possible that this too could be a method of procuring
an adjustment of relative position for the Director of Central
Intelligence. However, this has the obvious danger of getting caught
in the general shuffle for position and it would seem preferable to
seek an earlier adjustment through other legislation.
W. For general background and to demonstrate the imbalance
of the over-all Government pay structure, it is pointed out that each
of the Joint Chiefs receives compensation of $29,126 per annum and
Ambassadors of Class 1 Missions receive $27, 500 per annum, while
the top category under FEPA, that is the 10 cabinet positions, remains
at $25, 000 per annum. It is interesting to note that at the time of the
passage of FEPA there were 18 individuals in the first three categories
under F EPA with the Director of Central Intelligence's position falling
into Category IV and today there are approximately 150 positions in
Government with compensation in excess of the salary provided for
Category IV under FEPA.
11. As a further example, it is of interest to compare compensation
and responsibilities of the Director of Central Intelligence with those of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The Director of Central Intelligence is the
principal adviser to the President and the National Security Council on
intelligence matters affecting the national security. The Joint Chiefs
of Staff by law are the principal military advisers to the President,
the National Security Council, and the Secretary of Defense on military
matters. The Director of Central Intelligence is in the $21, 000 per
annum category and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the
Chiefs of Staff of the Army and Air Force, Chief of Naval Operations,
and the Commandant of the Marine Corps each receives total pay and
allowances of $29,126 per annum.
12. If you agree that there should be an upward adjustment in
the positions of the Director of Central Intelligence and the Deputy
Director of Central Intelligence, it would seem most appropriate
that you take a strong position on this in any recommendations or
final report you might be making to the President upon leaving office.
Attachment
Appendix "All
e 'JIIN isla Rive o is
VL g C unsel
STAT
ry-
Approved For Re e pp 1 9 Dp6#iB0 Y000400260016-1
~~ 4
 Approved For Release 2004/12/15 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000400260016-1
The recommendation in paragraph 6 is approved. os
Approved For Release 2004/12/15 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000400260016-1
 Appro
Appro
Ir A 1 T T O
X 91S D
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
OFFICIAL ROUTING SLIP
TO
NAME AND ADDRESS
INITIALS
DATE
1
Legislative Counsel, 221 Ea
t
2
3
4
5
6
ACTION
DIRECT REPLY
PREPARE REPLY
APPROVAL
DISPATCH
RECOMMENDATION
COMMENT
FILE
RETURN
CONCURRENCE
INFORMATION
SIGNATURE
Remarks :
FOLD HERE TO RETURN TO SENDER
FROM: NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE NO.
DATE
FORM NO. Replaces Form 30-4
I APR 55 237 which may be used.
(40)
U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1955-0-342531