DCI AREA PERSONNEL CUTS FOR FY 1976

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80M00165A002900220033-4
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 8
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 30, 2004
• Sequence Number: 33
• Publication Date: March 24, 1975
• Content Type: MF

'r
4
Approved For Rele se 2004/a
~>VI00165A000220033-4
1,11 RI
2 4 MAR 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR: The Comptroller
SUBJECT :' DCI Area Personnel Cuts for FY 1976
REFERENCE : Your memo to multiple adses., dtd
14 Mar 75; Subject: Further Personnel
Cuts for 1976
1. In response to your memorandum, it is necessary to make a
few general observations before commenting on the manpower situations
in the specific offices of the DCI Area.
2. I have trouble equating the "16 (vacancies) in the DCI Area"
reported in your memorandum with the existing on-duty situation in each
of the DCI Area offices. True, we do have some contract authorization
slack in the Office of the DCI but you are aware of the reasons therefor.
"Slotting" as such in one or two offices is--shall I say--not precise.
But as far as the DCI Area as a whole is concerned, I project an on-duty
strength for 30 June 1975 of close to, if not eding, the combined
staff and full-time contract authorization of with additional man-
power-requirements still being sought by OGC, OLC, IG and ICS.
3. With reference to your paragraph 4(2), we are now, in a few
cases, using part-time staff or contract employees in the Offices of
the IG, GC, and ICS. I don't think much further possibility for part-
timers exists in the DCI Area.
4. Finally, as you are well aware, the long-term nature and
manpower requirements for personnel dealing with the several Presidential
and Congressional investigations of the Agency are at the moment unknown
to me. Several offices of the DCI Area have drafted or begged help from
a variety of places in the Agency and in fact, the Presidential and
Congressional Reviews Staff of the O/DCI exists as a quasi-official
unit without ceiling but with six people assigned. I frankly don't
know how long this situation should be or ought to be continued since
Regraded Admin-Internal
;~~?~ A
Use Only when separated ` ,; i f M
1 L
from Confidential attachment(s).
Approved For Release 2004/07/08: CIA-RDP80MOO165AO
25X1
25X1
 Approved For Re Vase 2004/0fjOjt ~qfff A' I00165A2900220033-4
I assume offices lending personnel for these functions will want to
recruit replacements at some time in the future or have their people
returned--especially the secretaries.
5. More specifically, however, the Director in one way or
another has indicated some sympathy for increasing manpower require-
ments in a few of the offices:
a. OGC (Attachment 1) 4/5 slots
b. OLC (Attachment 2) 2 slots
6. In addition, the Inspector General has discussed. his man-
power predicament with the Director and envisions a hard requirement
for three additional slots (Attachment 3).
7. Although I have received as yet nothing specific from the
Intelligence Community Staff, I do know that their assessment of the
Director's objectives vis-a-vis the Intelligence Community, combined
with the support they will be required to provide the Congressional
investigations of'the Intelligence Community, will create a manpower
short fall up to perhaps 12 slots. I expect that the D/DCI/IC will
discuss this with the Director before submitting his-1976 operating
budget'.requirements. I still feel there is a case to-be made to
negotiate ceiling for IC Staff with 0MB separately and independently
of CIA.
8. Therefore, the information available to we at this time
suggests that there is no possibility whatever of approving any
further reductions for the FY 1976 in on-duty strength authorization
and in fact some increases will be required. Most of these increases
will in one way or another be the result of Congressional reactions
to press revelations concerning the Agency, Freedom of Information
requests, legal involvement of the Agency in a variety of areas, and
the increasing involvement of the Director in Intelligence Community
affairs. I am attaching some statistics, which in my best judgment,
reflect the manpower requirements as perceived by the office heads
concerned. Although you will see that I have maintained a distinction
between staff and full-time contract employees as far as the numbers
are concerned, please note I am dealing with full-time employees,
both staff and contract, and that the "operative" figures are the
totals. My experience suggests that it is impossible to project
what type of employee or employment relationship will be requested
on a specific individual until the individual has been identified.
Therefore, I welcome the "one ceiling" approach to manpower level
authorizations.
Approved For Release 200 ~' ' r ` 80M00l65A002900220033-4
 Approved For ReI ease 2004/07/01 -RDF> Q 65A0900220033-4
9. In sum then, while th 1976 budget for the DCI Area
reflects a total requirement of~full-time employees, estimates
indicate that office heads feel they have strong justifications for
increases totaling up to 20 additional full-time employees.
Administrative Officer, DCI
Attachments:
1. OGC Memo dated 10 Feb 75
2. OLC Memo dated 10 Mar 75
3. IG Memo dated 9 Dec 74
4. Statistics
C r;1'
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2004/07/08 : CIA-RDP80M00165AO02900220033-4
 25X1 Approved For Release 2004/07/08 : CIA-RDP80M00165AO02900220033-4
Approved For Release 2004/07/08 : CIA-RDP80M00165AO02900220033-4
 Approved For Release 2004/07/08: CIA-RDP80M00l65AO 900220033-4
41;_t S.it 4
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Central Intelligence
SUBJECT : Status of the Inspection Staff
~~Fxe~,aZivy .:2;istry. }
1. This memorandum is for your information only. It has to
do with the status of the Inspection Staff after a year and a half
in its reorganized form.
Background
2. At time of the reorganization of the Inspection Staff,
its reduction was based on an estimate that the component surveys--
which were being terminated- -took about 70% of the time of the staff.
There was some uncertainty concerning the actual work requirements,
and it was decided to have a staff of seven. This is made up of the
Chief of the Inspection Staff (who also serves as Deputy Inspector
General), four inspectors, and two secretaries. One of the four
inspectors is the CIA Director of Equal Employment Opportunity
(D/EEO), and another is the CIA Federal Woman's Program
Coordinator (FWPC); the D/EEO is engaged almost full time on
EEO work and the FWPC spends over half her time similarly.
During the first year and a half following the reorganization one
inspector has been involved full time on Watergate related issues
(not counting considerable time by the Inspector General and his
Deputy). The Staff also serves as focal point for processing appli-
cations for and inquiries about assistance to non-USIB government
agencies. A continuing major responsibility is that of employee
grievances. It was also intended that the staff would conduct special
studies such as you had found useful during the first half of CY-1973.
3. On 6 November 1973 I submitted to you a proposal for a
program for the Inspection Staff, which you approved on 9 January
1974 (copy attached). That paper noted the study of CIARDS (then
underway and since completed), a study of TDY leave from Vietnam
(which was completed as a more general study of leave policy for
hardship posts, which led to changes in practice), the Watergate
activity (which progressed to a draft history of the Agency's asso-
ciation in the matter, being suspended with the development of
the inquiry by Senator Baker), and the above-mentioned role of
focal point for approval of assistance to other government agencies.
25X1
Approved For Release 2004/0
,,C IA:RQ PgQM g0165A0029002
 V
Approved For Release 2004/07/08 : CIA-RDP80M00165A002900220033-4
There was general reference to specially designed interview programs
of employees, one of which is now near completion. There also
was a list of nine proposed special studies, only one of which we
have been able to conduct (on the Agency's handling of classification
and declassification of documents and papers); we had anticipated
that these studies would have led to some new subjects, an expectation
not realized due to the inability to take on those planned. It is clear
that the staff has not had the manpower to handle the tasks it has,
with the main impact being on the intended program of studies. We
have conducted one short ad hoc inquiry into possible violation of
conflict-of-interest provisions in solicitations for the Agency's
Educational Aid Fund.
4. The work load of employee grievances continues at about
the same level that it has been over the years, despite the reduced
size of the Agency. In CY-1973 we did handle a larger number of
cases than usual, the difference representing the surplus appeals
during the first hall of CY-1973 prior to reduction of the staff. While
the EEO program operates under separate legal authority and reports
directly to you, for purposes of this memorandum it is treated as part
of the work load of the Inspection Staff, taking, as it does, more than
75% of the time of the D/EEO and the FWPC combined; this work
clearly is increasing, which will further reduce the capability of the
staff to handle other work.
5. Because of the reservations about the staff's manpower,
at the time of the reorganization, approval was obtained to employ
an inspector on contract, to work on special studies while experience
was gained in the new organization form; she has worked only half
time, being responsible for the CIARDS study and the upcoming report
of'the headquarters interview program. Additionally, during the year
and a half since reorganization, we have had three officers on loan
from the DDI and DDS&T at different times, for a total of one man-
year. Further, we had a team of ten indexers on a ninety-day project
to extend the index of the files accumulated on Watergate. These
augmentations in manpower have not really solved our problem,
handling only special projects that could not be handled within existing
ceilings. We believe this experience, with the work there is to do,
indicates a need for more permanent arrangements for an expanded
T/O.
6. The work pattern for the past year is probably not fully
representative of what the future holds in store. However, it does
Approved For Release 20
~L. ~`i + r5 Sin F -1 i
-2-
/07/08 : CIA-RDP80 M 00165A002900220033-4
P11 P1, ,cep' - '.
 Approved For Release 2004/07/08 CIA-RDP80M00165A0J00220033-4
provide a reliable basis for predicting future trends. The EEO
program clearly is going to demand increasing time. The initial
phase of gathering information, conforming to Civil Service Commission
reporting requirements, stimulating the development of operating
policies and of procedures for following through on their implementation,
has been essentially accomplished. The small EEO staff will prove
inadequate to carry the momentum it has developed, especially for
the detailed follow-up that will be required for the next phase of
recruitment of minorities and advancement of qualified individuals..
There also seems to be a growing EEO grievance work load. The
two inspectors (D/EEO and FWPC) now assigned to that work before
long will be lost completely to other Inspection Staff duties, as well
as creating new work requirements of their own. Lew Warren, the
black professional from the DDS&T will help carry the EEO load, but
we do not even have a slot for him. In addition, the D/EEO recently
has sent you a memorandum to the effect that the EEO investigations
should be conducted by the IG. Apparently you approved this concept,
which clearly would require another inspector.
7. In addition to the growing EEO work, we have been con-
cerned that the staff is not always able to handle employee grievance
cases as expeditiously and as thoroughly as it should. With the
exception of the affirmative action part of the EEO program the staff
has been limited to being reactive rather than being able to take
initiatives of its own. In those instances in which we are told of defects
and dislocations in the management of things, we have been unable to
inquire into them sufficiently to know if they are in fact problems,
and if so whether they are serious enough to warrant further study.
Conclusion
8. As we have reviewed our experience and work load, in terms
of t:he direction things are taking, it has become increasingly evident
that we are understaffed. In looking at the clearly growing EEO
program we have concluded that there should be a separate EEO Staff,
in the Office of the Inspector General, with three officers and one
secretary, representing an increase of one officerl and
his slot) and one secretary. We believe that the remaining two inspectors
(not including the beputy Inspector General, who handles a share of
the case load), should be augmented by one officer.' This is essential
to ensuring that the grievance case load' is _anc'C1'ed effectively, as well
as hopefully being able to handle a modest program of special studies
Approved For Release 2004/07/08 : CIA=R.DP,$QJV 00165A002900220033-4
25X1
 Approved For Release 2004/07/08 CIA-RDP80M00165AO02900220033-4
as time permits. In addition, if we have to do the EEO investigations,
a second officer will be needed. The Audit Staff will not be affected
by these changes.
9. I realize that the manpower and budget restrictions being
imposed on both the Agency and the DCI area make assignments to
the IG Staff difficult. However, I also believe that the experience
over the past year and a half has demonstrated clearly that the
Inspection Staff was reduced below a realistic level in June 1973,
both for the work it had to do then and particularly for the work that
it was to do under the growing EEO program. I would like the
opportunity to discuss these problems, with you further at your
convenience.
25X1
Donald F. Chamberlain
Inspector General
Attachment: a/ s
Approved For Release 2004/07/08 : CIA-RDP80M00165AO0022900220033-4
. ,. M ~ ~ R 1e~rf- eit~ nw3 pr -
4 n r- h a i:J~