POSSIBLE RAB PROJECTS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP78-00433A000100060019-6
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 14
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 6, 2002
• Sequence Number: 19
• Publication Date: October 26, 1971
• Content Type: MF

Approved For.ReleUe 2002 ,$-00433A000?0060019-6
2 6 Cx 7971
Chief, Records Administration Branch
?ossib1* Projects
Your memorandum to tC/SSS dated 30 August 1971
1. I I and 2 have given your referenced memorandum a
have wide-ranging implications for the CIA records management
program, as well as for your trench. I would like to have you treat
separately the formalization of controls for limiting directorate
Records Center deposits. Please provide me by 27 October 1971 with
a written response to the questions contained in paragraph 1(A)
`"1 ':aA4 Actions (first page of attachment). Be prepared to Initiate
preparation of the associated policy paper (paragraph Z(B)) imediately
following our discussion of your response -- this is indeed a first
,xiority.
2. In the attachment, I have. provided comments and questions
Lch:you should respond in writing, before proceeding with the.
projects. I would like to have your response also treat the following
general questions a
a. Identify any changes in priorities you feel are
prate.
b. Firm up YwhichB personnel will work on each proje
(1) developing a project plan
(2) Implementing
Monitoring after Implementation
c. When will work begin on, each project plan?
d, ~iov long will it take to:
slop each project plan (bearing in mind com--
petition for time from on-going work and other
proposed 3 projects)?
(2) Implement and complete each project?
Approved For Release 2002, t". Ihi
YA1?Q , 60019-6
d,tir, t ,tt~ St,;~
 Approved For ReI se 2
RIMEWIREP78-00433ANUI00060019-6
VC
means should you consider our treatment of your
project proposals as all-encompassing. Feed free to add brief ob-
ervations where clarity will be nerved in respond
as well as the substance of the attached. Although I want to see
your response in writing, please seep if you wish to 25X1A
discuss all or any part of this. After I receive your written answe
a should jointly establish specific time frames for development of
ct plans (or initiation of projects) for those undertakings
4. 1 would like to have your response to this memorandum,
paragraph 1) and attachments no later than 19 evber 1971.
/s1
Chief
art Services . taff
DDS/SSS/LRF:pea (21 October 1971)
o & 1 - C/
l --
1 -
1 - 0. E.b ect
1 - SSS/Chrono
Approved For Release 2002Ic! 1 W
I-00433A0001 00060019-
 Approved For Release 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433A000100060019-6
First Priority Group
1. Formalize controls for limiting directorate net annual volumes
retired to the Records Center.
(A) RAB Actions -
1. What statistics will we provide for RMO's? How often -
monthly - quarterly - etc.? Will they be accepted by
the directorates?
2. At what point do we "blow-the-whistle" when it appears
they are exceeding annual net growth? (after 6 months?)
a. Will we be prepared to offer specific "guidance"
on directorate records collections - e.g.:
(1) Recommend reduction in retention periods?
(2) Urge microfilming (e.g., DCS - contact and
case files).
b. Will the guidance be formalized by memo to senior
RMO's?
3. At what point do we advise directorate managers that
they have problems - i.e., take it out of RM channels?
a. Who advises who - Mr. Coffey to directorates, or
to Exec. Officer?) STATINTL
(B) Prepare policy paper from C/SSS to Senior RMO's defining our
policy on (but not limited to): ,
Approved For Release 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433A000100060019-6
 Approved For Rel a 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433AOOW0060019-6
1. Records Center reduction effected by directorates from
their 1 July 1971 base. If there is a net reduction
any one year, who gets credit? Assume the directorate
concerned and that they can use this gain to increase
their succeeding year allowance.
2. Conversely what limits shall be placed on directorate
"overdrafts" if they exceed their 1000 cu. ft. annual
net increase? For instance, if DDP is charged with
2,500 cu. ft. of OF records -- how long will we let
them carry the "overdraft" this will create?
3. Transfers to Archives to reduce directorate balances at
0
How will this be done? What approval required?
Who makes "determination"? Are the records truly
archival? How do we staff this - if detailed analysis
is required?
Approved For Release 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433A000100060019-6
 Approved For Rele 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433A0000060019-6
18 October 1971
First Priority Group
II. Analysis of forms functions, consolidating similar forms, and
evaluation bulk procurement.
(A) Analysis and consolidation:
Of what does analysis consist? Review of form file? Desk
audit? Comparison of forms? How start? How much time to
complete? Begin when? How many man-hours per week? Role
of components? Records Officers? Who develops consolida-
ted new forms -- RAB or components? Should we have a forms
management seminar to kick off? How many forms are subject
to analysis? When do we next screen forms, query components
as to their continued utility?
(B) Bulk procurement of forms: Does this just mean making
larger unit purchases? How does appropriate level get
established -- past usage? What about unplanned obso-
lescence? Are possible savings going to outweigh losses
from obsoleted forms? Who will store bulk? Where? What
about the other side of the coin -- microprinting, where
only small quantities required? Possible savings? Speed
of response to requests? Break-even point on numbers of
forms? Cost of specialized equipment, if needed? PSD
capability and willingness to handle?
Approved For Release 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433A000100060019-6
 Approved For Rel a 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433AODW0060019-6
18 October 1971
(C) Training of component RMO's in forms management programs:
assume we can get management backing to insist that selected
components who are the largest users of forms have one or
two people designated and trained in forms analysis and
design. Specifically the two-week forms management course
at NARS. Which components are involved? Assume every
office in DDS, but what about other directorates? Come up
with proposal on how we manage a training program to
identify, select and insist that right personnel from
the right components get needed training.
Approved For Release 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433A000100060019-6
 Approved For Re a 2002/06/05: CIA-RDP78-00433A00W00060019-6
18 October 1971
First Priority Group
III. Accelerate directorate completion of retention plans to identify
their records of permanent value and offices of record. Develop
glossary - undisputed definition of terms. Develop precise state-
ment as to progress in each directorate, plus DCI area. Who is
working latter --
Progress statement should give brief
history, directorate protagonists and antagonists, steps required
to resolve issues, timetables, RAB role, management level assis-
tance required, purposes to be served, beneficiaries, prognosis
of success in each directorate. How are directorates approaching
identification of offices of record? Who makes final decisions,
or are there any? Special problems DD/P may have, if any? Who
will update retention plans? How frequently? Periodically? Who
approves retention plans? Coordination/concur level? Who, at
the working level, will actually use retention plan? Who will.
have copies?
Approved For Release 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433A000100060019-6
 Approved For Rel a 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433A00GM0060019-6
First Priority Group
IV. Complete the computerized central data base of all Agency records
(past ten years) and present related records equiment. While you
have this as one of your number one priorities, I am .not sure it
should be so in light of your estimate of approximately one man
year (2 persons 1/2 year) required to format the input and intro-
.duce it into the computer. I have difficulty reconciling the
benefits you described (4 October) with costs inherent in losing
the services of two people rrom your Branch
STATINTL
for 6 months or so. Nor do I see SIPS loaning us a qualified
individual to work on this problem, especially since they are
aiming to begin SIPS operations in May 1972, and a real crunch
will exist in terms of SIPS need for skilled manpower. Nonetheless,
with the strength of your convictions, I believe you should draw
up a staff paper on this subject, iterating: background, ingredients,
personnel involved, time required, where accomplish, outside skills
needed, politics - if any, beneficiaries of product, identify
product -- with specific examples, frequency of update, machine
time, frequency of output, relationship of output to Records Center
deposit restrictions on directorates. Attach copies of any previous
staff work completed regarding this subject.
Approved For Release 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433A000100060019-6
 Approved For Rel a 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433A0O 00060019-6
Second Priority Group
1. Develop improved communications with RMO's and support officers
relative to records program opportunities and requirements by
greater use of meetings, inspections of component programs, reports
and publications.
This is listed as a number two priority but I think it might
better be classified as a number one priority. I would think that
a first move should be a careful analysis of what our communica-
tions objectives are with (a) RMO's and (b) support officers.
This analysis should be extended to separately examine all the
various means by which communications practicably can be improved,
how they can be employed, frequency, personalities and politics
involved, etc.
I suggest that a bit of soul searching would be profitable
here, before diffusing our engeries on spasmic, illy-coordinated
attacks, upon isolated elements of the communications problem.
Approved For Release 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433A000100060019-6
 Approved For R se 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433AOe 100060019-6
Second Priority Group
sultants and NARS experts for in-house workshops and seminars in:
Forms Analysis and Design
RMO Duties and Responsibilities
Records Program Orientation for Office Heads
Correspondence and Mail Improvement
Vital Records Policy in Government and Agency
Records Inventories and Schedules
File Operations
Records Equipment and Supply Standards and
Procedures
My initial reaction is, by all means yes! Upon further reflection,
however, I find myself challenging the validity of presenting the
listed courses when they appear to be of a variety similar to those
NARS and/or the Department. of Agriculture present. I ask then,
should we present these in-house because our CIA procedures and
needs in a given area (forms, files, etc.) differ significantly
from other government agencies or industry? Or is it that we can
secure attendance (e.g., Records Program Orientation for Office
active role inj:.egords training for
Approved For Release 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433A000100060019-6
 Approved For ReI a 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433A00 00060019-6
(.leads) only by having an in-house presentation? I would think
that we should isolate each of the suggested courses, then weigh
such things as:
a.
Proposed. benefit? To whom?
b.
Who would conduct?
c.
How long? Frequency?
?
d.
e.
f.
Where
Who outlines? At what point?
For which course(s) is there the most urgent need?
Why?
g.
Role of OTR?
invites us to bring the ra
w STATINTL
problem to him, discuss before we work out details. I
think we have much homework to do before we even talk to
OTR).
h. Specifically how close are external training programs
coming to meeting our needs? (Review catalogs, brochures,
etc.)
i. Are we confronted with serious procedural differences
between directorates which would hinder or reduce to
generalities presentations on some or all. of the
suggested course subjects?
J. Aside from microfilm seminars, are there any relatively
new records subjects or new Agency procedures which would
lend themselves to short, 1 to 3-day, presentations?
I am unsure of our present procedure for encouraging attendance at
records programs. Is this all worked through senior RMO's? RMO's?
Do we involve support or admin officers at all? Directly? Should
Approved For Release 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433A000100060019-6
we if we do not?
 Approved For Refs se 2002/06/05: CIA-RDP78-00433AOI 4+100060019-6
Second Priority Group
III. Establish Agency Archives Operations and Staff.
a. This subject is a whopper but I find myself still in
the dilemma of being unable to predict with any
confidence:
1. Whether there will be a formal CIA Archives Pro-
gram.
2. Where organizationally the Agency Archivist will
(not should) fit.
b. We (SSS) aren't going to "establish" an Agency Archives
operation and Staff but perhaps we should be better
prepared to discuss more intelligently a number of
operational/procedural matters if the Agency gets an
on-going Archives Program. Where could it be placed
organizationally? (excluding O/DCI, as even
Dr. Ehrmann has given up on that) Several possible
arrangements occur to me:
1. In SSS reporting to C/SSS
2. In SSS reporting to C/RAB
3. In O/DDS reporting to DD/S
4. In O/DDS reporting to EO/DDS
5. In an entirely new unit (e.g., combination Archives
and Records Management) reporting to the DD/S
Approved For Release 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433A000100060019-6
6. Other
 Approved For Re se 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433AOW00060019-6
c. How procedurally (be specific) would an archives program
be implemented if proposed ere approved STATINTL
essentially as now written?
1. Identification of archives:
(a) Who does it? From what? Tie in retention
plans and records control schedules.
(b) Role of component records officers, senior
RMO's, directorate archivists, directorate
historians, directorate management, CIA
Records Officer, CIA Archivist, Chief, A&RC
(and will the latter's role be changed upon
approval of a CIA Archives Program?).
(c) Who resolves disputes?
2. Responsibility for protection of identified archives?
Access approved by whom?
3. Any changes in procedures for destruction of records?
4. What would be the physical location of:
(a) The CIA Archivist (and staff)
(b) The directorate archivists
(c) The archives
5. What educational measures would be required in order
to initiate an Archives Program:
(a) Brief supervisors?
(b) Publish implementing directives?
(c) Conduct short archives course (for whom?)?
Approved For Release 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433A000100060019-6
 Approved For R6Xse 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433A0100060019-6
Third Priority Group
I. Analyze the potential savings possible with an Agency reports
management program and outline a formal plan and procedure.
A. While the recent reports study and report required by 0MB
generated mild management interest, was the interest
sufficient to promise receptivity to a continuing reports
management program? Is this again a case where very senior
level CIA management must be convinced of the need before we
could get our foot in the door to implement a reports program?
If we had such backing, could we deliver with a program that
would be demonstrably beneficial to the Agency? (In other
words, not just a "papering" exercise.)
B. Did the content of the Agency's report on reports (0MB) have
sufficient validity to use it for a springboard for a con-
tinuing reports program?
C. Do we have the manpower to monitor a continuing reports
program? Will the component records officers carry most of
the burden? How much would RAB do? Optimally? Minimally?
Approved For Release 2002/06/05 : CIA-RDP78-00433A000100060019-6