OTR AUDIT SURVEY

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP81-00896R000100240012-9
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 18, 2001
• Sequence Number: 12
• Publication Date: February 12, 1976
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP81-00896R00010O24001.2-9,f
12 FEBRUARY 1976
25X1A
MEMORANDUM FOR: CHIEF OF STATION.,
25X1A
25X1A
REFERENCE . MEMO TO DTR FROM C/AS/OIG DATED 20 JANUARY 1976,
SAME SUBJECT
1. I THINK I SPEAK FOR THE DD/O IN STATING THAT THE DD/O HAS NO
PARTICULAR DESIRE TO ADMINISTRATIVELY CONTROL-OPERATIONS TRAINING AT
THE OR IN ALT. WHAT HE DOES,WANT IS RECOGNITION OF THE FACT THAT
THE PRODUCT FROM OPERATIONS TRAINING COURSES WILL SERVE IN THE DO AND
THE TYPE OF TRAINING AND THE QUALITY OF THE TRAINING MUST BE RESPONSIVE
TO THE DO REQUIREMENT. To INSURE THAT THIS IS DONE., THE FOLLOWING
MECHANISM IS ALREADY IN EFFECT:
A. THE OPERATIONS TRAINING GROW IS UNDER THE EFFECTIVE
DAY-TO-DAY SUPERVISION OF A 'DO OFFICER. 90% OF THE INSTRUCTOR
STAFF ARE DO OFFICERS.
13. THE DEPUTY FOR OPERATIONS TRAINING/TR HEADQUARTERS IS
PLACED SO THAT HE CAN CONVEY THE POSITION OF THE DD/O TO OTR
HEADQUARTERS IN RESPECT TO OPERATIONS TRAINING., BOTH_AND
ALT., AND THOSE OTHER TRAINING ACTIVITIES THAT AFFECT THE DO;
FOR EXAMPLE., MANAGEMENT COURSES) LANGUAGE TRAINING., ETC.
C. THE DO TRAINING TASK FORCE IS A MECHANISM WHICH IS
CAPABLE OF IDENTIFYING OPERATING DIVISION TRAINING NEEDS IN
RESPECT TO OPERATIONS TRAINING COURSES. THIS TF SHOULD BE
INSTITUTIONALIZED RATHER THAN OPERATE ON AN AD HOC BASIS
AS IS NOW THE CASE.
2. MY EXPERIENCE SO FAR HAS SHOWN THAT OTR HAS NOT INTRUDED IT-
SELF INTO THE DAY-TO-DAY TRAINING ACTIVITIES IN OPERATIONS TRAINING.
EXCEPT IN MINOR AND INSIGNIFICANT WAYS., OTR HAS DEFERRED TO DO DESIRES
IN RESPECT TO WHAT SHOULD BE TAUGHT AND HOW MUCH OF IT SHOULD BE TAUGHT.
TEACHING METHODOLOGY IS ANOTHER MATTER AND I BELIEVE OTR RIGHTFULLY
CAN CLAIM TO EXPERTISE IN THIS FIELD. I AM NOT AWARE OF ANY SERIOUS
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OTR AND THE DO ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE. IN'SUMMARY.,
THE DO IN FACT CONDUCTS THE TRAINING PRETTY MUCH AS IT SEES FIT., MORE
BECAUSE THERE IS A COMMUNITY OF VIEWS BETWEEN THE DO AND OTR RATHER
THAN ANY COMMAND RELATIONSHIP.
[2 IMPDET
CL BY o6o6o{
Approved For Release 20(f/03/04 CIA-RDP81-00896R000100240012-9
25X1A
25X1A
 Approved For Releae'2001/03/04 : CIA-R?P81-00896W00100240012-9
25X1 A
3. MR. NELSON HAS STATED, ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS, THAT HE HAS
NO INTEREST IN ASSUMING MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE- So
LONG AS_ AND OTR MANAGEMENT DO NOT BECOME SO INVOLVED IN OPERATIONS
TRAINING ON A DAY-TO-DAY BASIS AS TO DETRACT FROM THE DO INPUT, I SEE
NO POSSIBILITY THAT MR. NELSON WILL WANT TO TAKE OPERATIONS TRAINING
UNDER HIS WING. BY THE SAME TOKEN, YOU COULD ALSO SAY THAT LANGUAGE
TRAINING RESPONDS PRIMARILY, IF NOT COMPLETELY, TO DO REQUIREMENTS
AND THUS SHOULD COME UNDER THE DO. MR. NELSON SURELY IS NOT INTERESTED
IN THIS ONE.
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
4. THE AUDIT REPORT IS INCORRECT IN STATING THAT THE DO HAS THE
CAPABILITY TO PROVIDE ITS OWN OPS TRAINING. OF COURSE, THE DO CAN
DO THIS BY REORGANIZING AND ESTABLISHING A TRAINING COMPONENT USING
THE DO OFFICERS HERE AND IN ALT. IT WOULD ALSO NEED SPACE TO HANDLE
THE TRAINING, 1. E.,_ ET AL.
5. AS FOR THE_ PORTION OF THE REPORT, OPERATIONS TRAINING
ACCOUNTS FOR ABOUT 50 - 6o OF THE FACILITY UTILIZATION AT THE _
THIS DOES NOT MEAN, AT LEAST NOT TO ME, THAT BECAUSE OPERATIONS
TRAINING UTILIZES THE FACILITIES MORE THAN ANY OTHER ACTIVITY THAT
THE- MUST BE UNDER THE DO. IT DOES MEAN THAT DO EQUITIES MUST BE
CONSIDERED. IF THE -BECOMES ESSENTIALLY A LOGISTICS BASE OR
STATION RESPONDING PRIMARILY TO DDA REQUIREMENTS (NON-OPS TRAINING
REQUIREMENTS), PERHAPS A LOG OFFICER OR AN M CAREERIST SHOULD BE THE
COS. HOWEVER, IF THIS RESULTED IN EITHER TYPE OFFICER INTRUDING INTO
MATTERS AFFECTING OPERATIONS TRAINING, THEN I BELIEVE WE HAVE THE BASIS
FOR A PROBLEM DOWN THE LINE. IF THERE IS AN EQUAL DIVISION BETWEEN THE
USE OF THIS INSTALLATION BETWEEN DO EQUITIES AND DA EQUITIES, I BELIEVE
A DO OFFICER TO BE AS WELL QUALIFIED TO RUN THE_ AS ANY OTHER OFFICER.
IF OPERATIONS TRAINING IS SECONDARY IN THE SCALE OF PRIORITIES AT THE
- THEN CLEARLY THE DO WILL HAVE TO ADJUST OR MOVE ELSEWHERE. I DO
NOT SEE EITHER POSSIBILITIES OCCURRING. IN SUMMARY, THE CURRENT SYSTEM
SEEMS TO BE WORKING WELL SO WHY FOOL WITH IT. IF THE DO PROGRAM IS
BEING SHORTCHANGED AT THE = THERE IS AN ESTABLISHED MECHANISM TO
BRING THIS TO THE ATTENTION OF THE DD/O, DTR, AND THE DD/A.
DISTRIBUTION:
ORIG AND I - ADDRESSEE
I - DEP/OPS
Approved For Release 2001/03/04 : CIA`-RJp81-00896R000100240012-9
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
 Approved For Relea2001/03/04: CIA-RDP81-00896&000100240012-9
USr ONLY
4 February 1976
STATINTL
MEMORANDUM FOR: Chief of Station
SUBJECT : OTR Audit Survey
REFERENCE Memo for DTR from C/AS/OIG, dtd 20 Jan 76,
same subject
1. Following are my comments regarding the subject survey:
STATINTL
STATINTL
a. The audit remarks regarding DDO training are certainly not
the result of any new enlightenment. As you know, this has been a much
discussed topic. I happen to agree that the responsibility should be
DDO's. It follows, of course, that the DDO training personnel would
have to keep up with training techniques, etc. Also the matter of whose
budget (DDO or m would include what costs would have to be worked out.
I believe the indication that the OTR Deputy for Ops training and the
Deputy for Ops positions might be eliminated is somewhat misleading. STATINTL
Certainly, the OTR position could go but the -Deputy for Ops (whatever
one might call it) would have to remain and function essentially as the
Dep/Ops does today. The chain.of command would perhaps change in that STATINTL
the operations training would merely be sattelited on= for administrative
support.
b. Regarding the matter of the status of I believe you STATINTL
know my feelings from past discussions. I believe the should function
directly under the DDA and the COS should be an "M" officer. An officer
with a general knowledge of all DDA functions and a knowledge of DDO fieldSTATINTL
activities would, in my opinion, be an ideal candidate. I assume they are
using the term "logistical" in a broad sense. As you well know, the functions
of the Support Group go far beyond the functions associated with the Office
of Logistics. I point this out lest someone considers putting =under OL.
STATINTL
c. If one considers transferring Ops training to the DDO, then
it seems to me the responsibility for MOTC should go to the DDO also. STATINTL
2. In conclusion, if the questions raised are to be reviewed, the
Audit Staff should, in my opinion, drop out. A joint task force or perhaps
an additional task for the - group would be more appropriate.
STATINTL
Distribution: Deputy ior Support
Orig - COS
1 - T)/Op el
Approved Ep ease 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP81-00896ROO0100240012-9
ADMIN].S`iliATIVE USE ONLY
 x- A. L '
For, 200`1/03/04 ? CIA-RDF - "000-V14024001 SECRET
RCLITINiNG AND K'EECORD SHEET
25X1A j
TO: (O[rcer designation, room number, and
building)
DDTR
1026 C/C BLDG
DTR
1026 C/C BLDG
~
@
g
J. 62 U F EvoiCi .S
FC {
COMMENTS (Number each comment to show from whom
to whom. Draw a line across column after each comment.)
PER INSTRUCTIONS FROM THE DIR9 AT-
TACHED HEREWITH ARE THE COMMENTS
OF THE DEPUTY FOR OPERATIONS= 2
AND DEPUTY FOR SUPPORT= CON- 2
CERNING THE IG's AUDIT SURV[Y OF
OTR. ALTHOUGH I FIND THAT THE
DD/A HAS REPLIED TO THE AUDIT
SURVEY, I AM FORWARDING THE AFORE-
MENTIONED COMMENTS FOR YOUR INFOR-
MATION.
-210I/03104 .UUA-R1 8i-OO89.6RfOO.1Q2annJ -A- -,. ,
~~ .-.
Approved+or ReIea
`
._.?__-. - _
FORM
US
[r_I laf I[ C~ 1 E SL ~_-l LISE F tY ~l UNCLASS HED