SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE REQUEST FOR A STUDY OF THE OPERATIONS DIRECTORATE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP81M00980R002900010026-2
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: T
• Document Page Count: 8
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 19, 2004
• Sequence Number: 26
• Publication Date: July 25, 1978
• Content Type: NOTES

Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP81 M00980R002900010026-2
2 JUL 19?
NOTE FOR: Deputy Director for Operations
SUBJECT : Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Request for a
Study of the Operations Directorate
In its report on the 1979 authorization bill, the Senate Select
Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) asked that we undertake a study
to be completed by 1 November 1978 which addressed a number of
questions on a count country bass dating to the DDO program.
A copy of that request is attached (Attachment A).
On 28 April Don Gregg put together a list of talking points
for the DDCI to use with Bill Miller (Attachment B) which basically
noted that the Senate's request constituted micromanagenenL and
proposed znstea a more 1invi-te d fiat Taszcally responsive effort. The
D alked wif aB lla 11 Miller and believed that Bill had agreed to cur
counterproposal. Bill suggested that Danny Childs talk with me and that
we work out the details.
I have had two conversations with Danny on this subject
in the last three months. In sum, I gave Danny a list of the six
items that the DDCI had told Bill Miller we would be willing to do
and told him we planned to proceed. Danny checked with Bill who said
that he did not want to make a big issue out of this problem but that he
thought he and the DpCI had agreed to examine 31 countries in detail,
not just the three hypothetical countries as we had proposed. Bill thought
this would dovetail nicely with the effort we had under way with the
NSC and would eliminate some duplication of effort. (As an aside,
Danny also said that what he had originally envisioned in framing the
request was a document which had been prepared by OPPB, the predecessor
of this Office, which listed countries in which there was a DDO presence,
related resources, and specific projects .iLh a line or two of narrative
on each protect as to what its purpose was. We have made an effort
25X1 here and through and others who were here at that time to
locate that document. However, we have not been able to find it. In
any event, I do.-not believe we would be willing to give Congress, at
his point, a document which resembled that one in any major respect.)
While talking to Danny Childs, I kept Don Gregg informed.
His view of wnat we should give the Senate has shifted over time,
particularly as the President took the initiative with the Congress
25X1
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 -fCIA-RDP81 M009
 Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP81 M00980R002900010026-2
on the security issue and as he has proceeded with the last two briefings
of Jim Bush on the DDO's program (Attachments C and D). In our last
conversation, Don and I agreed it made little sense to give the Senate
more than we are willing to give the House. If anything, we should
be doing the reverse, given the small number of people involved in the
House and their apparently superior record thus far with respect to
handling sensitive information.
As I understand it, the situation now is that we have agreement
to proceed with Points b through g of Attachment B as discussed by the
DDCI with Bill Miller.. Point a, however, ?G in_d1-spute. The Senate
originally asked for a description of major substantive objectives
country by country and a description of all clandestine human source
collection activities aimed at achieving these objectives. We counter-
proposed that we are willing to provide details on objectives, targets,
and assets of three stations--one small, one medium, and one large--without
specifically identifying them. Bill Miller has apparently indicated
that it would be all right if we compromised at 31 countries. The-question
is where do we go from here? As noted above, several concerns have become
more s arp y ocused since t .is debate began. We are increasingly concerned
about the fact that the Senate gave us very detailed "guidance" by project
and country in the covert action area when given detail similar to that
now being requested for clandestine collection. Obviously, we are not
anxious to have this happen. Also, the Administration's posture with
respect to making sensitive information available to the Congress has
t.iffened somewhat, and the DCI has made a particular point of this
issue with the SSCI. Third, we are presently engaged in a major briefing
effort with the House Select Committee. Given their relatively exemplary
record in handling information of this type, it does not seem wise at
this point to go farther with the Senate than we are with the House.
Could we discuss where we go from'here?
V.
James H. Taylor
Comptroller
Attachments:
A. SSCI Request for DDO Study
B. DDCI Talking Points
C. Memo re Briefing for J. Bush
D. Memo re Briefing for HPSCI Staff
Approved For Release 2004/0CI1.6 'tJA.iRDP81 M00980R002900010026-2
 25X1 Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP81 M00980R002900010026-2
Next 1 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP81 M00980R002900010026-2
 ATTACHMENT B
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP81 M00980R002900010026-2
28 April 1978
MEMORANDUM FOR: Associate Deputy Director
for Operations
FROM Donald P. Gregg
Special Assistant to the
DDO for External Oversight
SUBJECT Talking Points Paper for DDCI
1. Attached hereto is a Talking Points paper for the
DDCI to use with SSCI Staff Director William Miller next
week.
2. Also attached-for the DDCI's information is a
Memorandum for the Record dealing with Mr.. Miller's
perceptions of the Directorate's sensitive collection program.
25X1
Donald P. G gg
STAT
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP81 M00980R002900010026-2
 Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP81 M00980R002900010026-2
TALKING POINTS
Background
The SSCI's request for a voluminous and detailed report
of the Directorate of Operation's clandestine human source
collection activities comes at a pivotal time in the Agency's
relations with Congress. We have now dealt with the SSCI for
about two years in a forthcoming and cooperative manner. For
the SSCI to request the great amount of detail, which is
embodied in their recommendations on the FY79 NFIP, seems
both unjustifiable and unnecessary., If'we accede, we will
continue to place ourselves in an overly submissive posture
toward Congress thereby delaying indefinitely the time when
we can move into a more collegial relationship with the over-
sight committees. At the same time, the Directorate needs to
recognize that one of the murky areas in the SSCI's perception
of CIA operations is clandestine collection. Our objective-
should be to help the SSCI become more familiar with and
confident in our internal decision-making processes without
laying bare our entire covert collection apparatus. We may
well have to go through the same procedure with the HPSCI in
the near future. (See attached Memorandum for tho-Record in
which Bill Miller articulates the current SSCI perception of
the Directorate's clandestine collection operations.)
To respond to the SSCI request, as now formulated,
would require us to describe the operating directives,
clandestine assets and ongoing costs o.ver the next five years
of every Station in the world.
- To respond in this amount of detail would go far
beyond oversight into "micro-management" of CIA by the SSCI.
- The amount of detail would be so voluminous as to
make it impossible for SSCI membership to draw overall
conclusions about our clandestine operations.
A practical result would be that staffers would focus
on specific operations in individual. Stations, paving the way
for detailed operational questions and second-guessing from
those who lack professional qualifications in the intelligence
field.
Approved For Release 20 ~Q # f~181 M00980R002900010026-2
 Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP81 M00980R002900010026-2
I
Risk of leaks would increase exponentially.
What we are willing to do is:
a. describe in detail the objectives, targets and
assets of three Stations, one small, one medium and one
large, without specifically identifying them;
b. present some actual case. studies which lay out p oD
the ways in which difficult operational dec..sions are
made on clandestine collection operations were both
risks and gains-are high;
c. present, as?requested, an evaluation of the fV G
contribution of the DO's clandestine collection opera- ILLEGIB
tions to finished intelligence;
d. present, as requested, a qualitative assessment
of the value and effectiveness of our clandestine
collection operations;
e. discuss and explain in the context of current
how the Directorate is becoming
more and more exclusively focused on collection targets ILLEGIB
which cannot be approached through overt means-;
f. present, as requested, funding projections by
operating division for the next five years;
g.. pass to the SSCI the recently completed investi-
gation of the DO.by the House Appropriations Committee
25X1
Approved For Release 200 1 81 M00980R002900010026-2
 Approved For Release 2004/06/15: CIA-RD~10P98q~2
13 July 1978
MEMORANDUM FOR: Acting Deputy Director for Operations
FROM Donald P. Gregg
Chief, Policy and Coordination Staff
Liaison and Oversight Control
SUBJECT Meeting with Jim Bush of House
Permanent Select Committee on intelligence
1. The second session with Jim-Bush of the HPSCT
was held on 12 July, lasting about two hours and fifteen
minutes. The first hour was spent in going over with
Mr. Bush the House Appropriations Committee SF,I team
report. Mr. Bush was allowed to read the DDCI's letter
tc Chairman Mahon giving overall Agency reaction to the
report, and was also shown DDO-prepared summaries of ter
the report's major questions and compliments re the DDO.`
Mr. Bush read these summaries carefully, asked one or
two questions ("Why are Chiefs of Station opposed to
more NOCs?" and "Why is the State. Department opposed to
CIA reporting on economics?") and noted that there were,
as he put it, "some very nice words" in the report
regarding DDO's capabilities. Mr. Bush then flipped
through the first 40 pages of the report and seemed to
have absorbed its flavor. He appeared to agree with my
comment that-the report vas a useful and balanced look
at the Directorate'. I stated that'he"was welcome to
look at our copy at any time.
2. The second hour was spent with
I I ed off with a
description of the ways in which ;PDS seeks customer
comment on our reporting. This was followed by
iscussion of specific feedback from
customers, largely in the military RFD field. The
discussion -was kept at the SECRET ORCON level and no
reference was made to anything of a higher classification.
Mr. Bush appeared interested in this discussion and
asked that our next session - to be held next week - be
a continuation of the EPDS presentation. Mr. Bush ended
the meeting regretfully as he had to return to the Hill
for a meeting with Congressman Burlison. He thanked all
concerned and said the session had been useful to him.
f,. ,
l 11
whi i `~++~?J9s'1425X1
Approved For Rele r Q
 25X1 Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP81 M00980R002900010026-2
Approved For Release 2004/06/15 : CIA-RDP81 M00980R002900010026-2