PROVIDING CONGRESS WITH ZBB INFORMATION

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 10
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 3, 2004
• Sequence Number: 21
• Publication Date: February 14, 1978
• Content Type: MEMO

Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
February 14, 1978
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Director of Central Intelligence
SUBJECT: Providing Congress with ZBB information
In response to your query, the intent of the letter to McIntyre of
8 February was to indicate that we would show the way the budget
was sliced into ZBB decision units, but not show the priorities
assigned to each of the units.
Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
 STAT Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
 Approved For Release 2Q0e t415121 : A-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
ree or of entra me igence
Washington, D. C.20S05
F e WS
The Honorable James T. McIntyre
Acting Director
Office of Management and Budget
Washington, D.C. 20503
I am responding to your comment at the Cabinet Meeting of
16 January concerning the provision of Zero Base Budget information to
Congress during the FY 1979 budget hearings.
The committees which will review the National Foreign Intelligence
Program Budget will be provided information in our ZBB Consolidated
Decision Unit format, as well as by major program within the National
Foreign Intelligence Program. The Congressional Justification Books
prepared by individual elements of the community are structured along
ZBB lines.
I am prepared to provide more detailed information by individual
ZBB decision unit, should it be requested in the course of testimony.
I do not propose to provide decision unit rankings, since I feel
these are internal to the process within the Executive Branch by which
we arrived at the budget the President has sent to Congress. I am, of
course, ready to address the priorities reflected by the budget to
whatever extent any of the committees might desire.
Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
 Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
2
SUBJECT: Providing ZBB Information to Congress
Distribution:
Orig.--Addressee (J.T. McIntyre)
1--DCI/ER
1--A-D/DCI/IC
1--D/OPP/ICS
1--D/OPEI/ICS
'1--C/SS/ICS
1--IC Registry
1--OPBD Chrono
1--OPBD Subject
DCI/ICS/OPBD/Q:1ah/1/2.4/78
Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
 Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
THE DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE
FEB 8 1978
MEMORANDUM FOR: NFIP Program Managers
SUBJECT: Providing 7BB Information to Congress
1. At a recent Cabinet meeting, aim McIntyre stated that it has
been left to individual departments to determine what information on ZBB
isito be released to Congress.
2. Attached for your information is my letter to Jim expressing
my'intentions on the subject. I believe the letter also serves as
useful guidance in the course of preparation for the upcoming budget
hearings.
Attachment:
Letter to Director, Office of
Management and Budget, signed
by DCI, dated
Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
 STAT Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
 STAT
Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
NOTES RE: ADP STUDY
P. III.
In the second paragraph it is not clear whether the actual increase
in ADP costs between 1970 and 1978 has been two percent or two
percent per year. It would help to perhaps include the constant
dollar figure. You might add a sentence or two that says that the
productivity of ADP resources has risen very rapidly during this
period.
At the top it is not clear whether the investment of
represents real investment or outlay on both operations and investment.
STAT
P. IV just before paragraph 1.4
You might note that telecommunications is making it possible to
collect the same information with a smaller overseas work force and
computer internetting is making raw data available to a larger analytical
community.
The first sentence is a red flag. The DCI does not have management
control over all of these resources and so we need to think of a new
way to phrase that. I would propose "the DCI's near-term task is to
make sure that resources expended on these diverse information handling
capabilities are spent efficiently" or some such formulation.
P. VI
I suggest that in paragraph 3 you delete "will plan centrally".
P. VIII
First bullet: don't establish CISO as.a central planning organization.
Just establish it.
Same page
Last bullet: I don't understand the repeated references throughout to
the CIHS. I don't know what the invention of that adds to the discussion.
Last paragraph: Again central planning in a long-term plan for ADP-T.
These are probably unrealizable. The table Intelligence Program Historical
Trends footnote 3 - I don't'know what SPAF and SPN are. Why don't
you define these.
Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
 Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5 % Page Two
Notes:.re ADP Study
Page 3. Paragraph 1.2
This is really very muddled. Thel of total assets
refers to a number of different years and so is really a meaningless
sum. In any case, that's not the current value of the assets since
one would have to allow for depreciation in order to put it on a
comparable basis with the Fortune Magazine directory of private
firms' assets. Why not just say that the intelligence community is doubtless
the world's largest user of computers?
Page 7. Paragraph 1.11
The last two sentences. It is not clear which large class of files
is not reported on further.
Page 10. Paragraph 2.1
I think the reference to the study for the EEC is irrelevant. The point
is that with the expansion of the task at hand, the requirement for real
time and near real time analysis, and the declining levels of personnel
computer assistance of many different kinds is obviously essential.
Paragraph 2.2 Sentence at the the bottom of p. 10.
I think the preaching about functional interdependence has got a little
too much of a hortatory tone. .
Paragraph 2.3 is very troublesome. We are not going to have a coherent
system that consists of all the assets funded through the NFIP. We
will look for better ways to coordinate those assets and we will try
to achieve a balance between required performance and cost, but whether
we will get a "system" is certainly unclear and I don't think the CISO
will be able to settle that.
Page 13. Paragraph 3.1.
I think this is just dead wrong. In supporting their own departmental
missions, the various agencies of the Intelligence Community have in
fact been carrying out the overall mission of the Intelligence Community.
What they have not done is adjust at the margin. to make the changes
required--probably minor--that would make their interrelation more
effective. The concept of coordinated resources management across the
entire Community has not come to any focus at all.
Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
 SECRET Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
Page 3
Notes on ADP Study
February 13, 1978
P. 14, same paragraph.
It is not clear yet that an overall planning process is required,
but a supporting information system is indeed required, but let's
not call it a management information system. Those things are in
bad--justifiably bad--odor.
Paragraph 3.3 should reflect the current ambiguity and our uncertainty
about what a plan would presently look like. The level of detail
appropriate is not yet clear and the period of time over which
planning would be meaningful is not yet clear, and I am not sure that
we want to specify the responsibility for that plan would rest with
CSIO. I also do not want to include the proposed DCI directive. I
think the people who commented that it was inappropriate for inclusion
in the Congressional document were correct.. For example, an important
point that remains unresolved is whether there should be a plan for
ADP or whether ADP consideration should be included in documents like
SIGINT and Imagery plans.
Page 21, top of the page.
Is it really true that the problem of security is becoming more difficult
with the proliferation of hardware? Not particularly well informed--is
that vendors are moving toward greater commonality of systems. And I
don't understand the assertion at the bottom of the page that persons
with access to terminals are held to higher standards of security than
those with access to other forms of classified material. Could you explain
more fully?
Page 24.
I find the assertion that merely changing country codes would cost
several million dollars in reprogramming incredible. There exist
computer routines for sifting FORTRAN and other programs so that such
changes can be made by machine. Are we sure of our facts?
Top of page 25.
Again we have the CIHS. It's a chimera.
Paragraph 3.17
To automate or not to automate seems like a false choice. The real
question is how much. It's not a binary choice.
Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA=RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
 Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5
Notes re ADP Study
February 13, 1978
Page Four
Paragraph 3.18
It's not clear that the choice between off the shelf and specially
designed systems is best implemented and enforced through appropriate
actions at the community management level. We really want to make
sure that people at lower levels look at the choices recognizing that
they will be reexamined at the community level.
Paragraph 3.19
I'm not sure the first sentence is correct.
Bottom of p. 28.
The last two or three sentences seem like hortatory but vacuous
assertions.
Paragraph 3.21
The reference to the justification books in such complimentary fashion
seems self-serving considering our audience. They also seem unwarranted
given the lack of concrete progress that we have to cite in this report.
Paragraph 3.21 on page 30, the last couple of sentences.
The argument for a central planning office seems inappropriate for
this audience, although the last sentence seems right.
Paragraph 3.24
Again the offending CHIS. Figure 3.1 is not explained in the text
and something I simply fail to understand. Somebody may have once
found it useful but I find it merely mystifying.
Paragraph 3.31
Do we really want to task CSIO with responsibility for developing an
official plan and do so formally for the Congress? I doubt it. I
would delete paragraph 3.32 and 3.33 as well as all of the non-
underlined section of 3.34.
Paragraph 3.36 advertises the planning guidance as doing something I
don't think it does. 3.37 is also more grandiose than we are likely
to be able to deliver on right away. I am not sure what Figure 3.3
adds to the discussion. I think we want to talk about section 4 on
ll
y
conclusions and decide whether the promises here are ones we rea
want to. make and whether they are appropriate for.this document. I
will have a better. feel for that after-I have talked with
Approved For Release 2004/05/21 : CIA-RDP80M00772A000100020021-5