UNITED STATES INTELLIGENCE BOARD COMMITTEE ON DOCUMENTATION TASK TEAM V - BIOGRAPHICS MINUTES OF THE SIXTH MEETING - 25 JANUARY 1965

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80B01139A000500030007-9
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 17, 2002
• Sequence Number: 7
• Publication Date: February 2, 1965
• Content Type: MIN

Approved For ReeQ?6%1*RBI?r%#AlP8gB84I39A000030007-9
T/V/M?6
2 February 1965
U N I T E D S T A T E S I N T E L L I G?E N C E B 0 A R D
COMMITTEE ON DOCUMENTATION
Task Team V -> Biographies
Minutes of the Sixth Meet25 January 1965
Members or their Representatives Present
`? Myrs a
as M+ .
DIA - Mr,
STATE a- Mr.
NAVY - Mr.
ARMY a Mr,
NSA - Mr.
-? Mr.
AIR FORCE Lt.
I&NS a- Mr.
FBI - Mr.
SS ? Mr.
CSC - Mr.
tchell Stanley
Marvin t. Van Dera
Paul Anderson
01.
John L. Keefe
Earl W. McCoy
Frank S. Stoner
Pearley G. Buck
1. The minutes of the previous meeting were approved.
2. The Chairman advised the Team that the Terms of Reference,
as submitted by the Team to CODIB at its last meeting, were approved
with two minor additions. One was the addition of paragraph B 2 j
"Other facts bearing on system effectiveness or manpower Involved in
finding biographic, information". The second was to add the phrase
"and recommend follow on action" at the end of the last sentence of
the Recommendations paragraph. Each member was given a copy.
3. The Chairman cited an excellent article on computers which
he thought to be of interest to the group, in the December 1964
issue of "Computers and Automation".
Group I
Excluded from automatic
Downgrading and
Approved For Release 2002/01/30: CIA-RDP80B0113We00gfl6Q340II7=4?n?
C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-Ia-A~L
 CmO~1~mF~I-D=ESN?T~I-A~i;
Approved For Re4U.se 2002/01/30: CIA-RDP80B01139AO 00030007-9
4. The Team next considered the cost and manpower information
questionnaire that was part of the last minutes. The Secretary has
constructed a chart indicating which of the agencies have responded
to these questions and indicated to the group which agencies had
not. It was agreed that only the following would be required: the
total number (items lb6)under question 1 ; question 2 as it stands;
I combined answer for questions 3 & 4; 1 combined answer for questions
5 & 6. This means that there will be two questions to be answered
under personnel, one each under machines, supplies, space and cost
projection, making a total of six answers. The Team members indicated
that they would provide these answers to the Secretary in time for
a consolidated report to be prepared by the Secretary by the next
meeting.
5. The Team considered and agreed an definitions listed in
attachment A to the last minutes. A current corrected copy of the
biographic index facts sheet was passed to the members by the
Secretary. Discussion was held on the meaning of the "average
number of name searches per request" and it was agreed that the
procedures followed by most agencies of checking five or ten cards
on each side of an individual name being searched would not be con-
sidered part of this item, Additionally, the notation of the FBI?
number concerning six-way name variation check was deleted and a
re-estimate was provided by the FBI members for this element. A few
additional minor corrections were made by the members to the biograhic
index facts sheet on the spot. The NSA member requested that the
last sentence of paragraph 11 of the definitions be deleted as
irrelevant. The group then agreed that the next step would be for
sorhe Interpretations and observations to be prepared based on these
facts. The Chairman indicated that such a paper would be prepared
for the Team's consideration in the near future.
6. The Team was provided a blank chart by the Secretary entitled
"Interagency Name Checks, Volume' -- Time". Consideration was first
given to the volume figures. The Secretary pointed out that what was
meant here was the average number of requests made daily by each
requesting agency to each of the other agencies. Several of the
agencies have already provided these figures. It was agreed that
the remainder of the members would provide the Secretary with these
figures in time for the Secretary to provide a consolidated report
sheet to the members by the next meeting. Considerable discussion
then ensued concerning how the Team should handle reporting of the
time element. Two general approaches were contemplated. One would
be to have each agency report how long it takes each other agency
to provide a response to the normal request, excluding of course
those unusual cases which, for some reason, take an extremely long
time. The other approach would be to have each member report how
long it takes his agency to respond to a request from other agencies
on the average for the normal cases. (It was suggested that the
"normal" in both of these cases should include 80% or so of the
Approved For Release., /14111QD Q,tl39A000500030007-9
 C-O-N_F-I6-D-E-N-T_'1-A-L
Approved For Release 2002/01/30: CIA-RDP80B01139AOO6e00030007-9
requests being handled.) These considerations highlighted the role
of the on-site liaison officers and the question was raised as to
how to figure the response time under the approaches described above;
Should it be from the time the liaison officer gave the request
and received the answer, or when the request was sent and response
received by the home agency of the liaison officer? The next point
considered was whether the time should be calcuJ.ated at the index
level or at some other point in the processing? The question of
what is indeed a reply was discussed. This discussion also included
whether telephone calls and special methods or special couriers
should be considered in the time figures. It.was generally agreed
that these special cases were not to be considered part of the
figures which the Team is trying to acquire: A member suggested,
that the Team view the processing in the graphic sense by preparing
a flow chart including all the major elements of processing which
would include the worst as well as the best cases. Considerable
discussion was held concerning how days are counted. Those who
provide the service usually count the work days. Those receiving
the service usually count in calendar days. Another suggestion was
for the Team to provide a CODIB-approved sample form to accompany
a test group of requests.
7. From all of these suggestions it became clear that the
Team members needed more time to reflect on the best way of develop-
ing these facts about response times. Therefore, the Chairman
suggested that the members consider this problem, attempt to obtain
an informal sampling within their own offices from their operating
people as to how long, in general, it takes them to get answers
from other agencies and also determine how feasible it might be to
estimate the number of days that each member's agency takes to provide
an "average response" (recognizing that the word average must yet be
agreed upon by the Team).
8o The Chairman next pointed out that an appropriate questionnaire
on name rules has not yet been prepared for the member's consideration,
but that such a questionnaire would be provided the members in the
near future.
9. The Secretary requested each of the members to provide him,
by the next meeting, with an estimate of the time they or others on
their behalf had spent on Team matters from October through December 1964.
This has been requested by CODIB.
10. The Chairman announced a firm date for the proposed
symposium to be 22 and 23 April 1965, at which time the members plan
to go to a site near Washington for a two-day conference on Bio-
graphies. The Chairman suggested that the members come to the next
meeting prepared to make suggestions as to what subjects they might
like to cover, such as various methods of random access in computer
Approved For Release)2-N02/0'f%30-!-CfA?KD 8~1139A000500030007-9
 C-0-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-1-A-L %-
Approved For Ruse 2002/01/30 : CIA-RDP80B01139AOD9500030007-9
systems, data preparation problems, name elements name variants,
eta. The Chairman also reminded the members that attendance at
this symposium could be expanded to include appropriate additional
Individuals as desired;
11. It was agreed to request It. Gottsman, US Navy, to brief
the group on the name file of Chicago Title and Trust and the
Mormon church at the next team meeting to take place 11 February 1965
at 0930 hours at CIA Headquarters, A date was also settled on for
the group to visit the National Driver's Registration Service at
1717 H St. N.W., Rm. 867 in Washington on 25 February 1965 at 0930
hours. Both of these have been confirmed.
e e
25X1A
,. Approved For Release L?0$Q1J3-Oj_R&Pi$0-(1 1~39A000500030007-9