Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 9, 2016
Document Release Date: 
July 5, 2000
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
May 7, 1976
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP82-00357R000600080004-8.pdf115.77 KB
hLL 7 Ma)r 1976 FOR: Chief, Regulations Control Branch SUB?ECF sed Revision of Supergrade Personnel of STATINTL 1. P for coordination and publication is a proposed revision Of paragraphs a and b. These amendments are proposed on the bass of a ran&ns from the Secretary, CIA Mnageux9nt Committee approved by the DDCI on 25 February 1976. 2. 'f draft attached hereto has been informally reviewed by the DD/A. Distribution: Orig + 1 - Adse, w/att 1 - D-DDA, w/att 1 - D/Pegs, w/att 1 - OP/RS, w/att ITATINTL OP/P&O/ :11 (7 May 76) Approved For RIay2e .4l'/1~~! 6#M' Y Ail Y ^ -? m 1^ , p4-8 W 4 TART $ -OO R A IDE1 TIAL -] SE ET { ] 1UNLASSIFI pprovedI- r W1111ERNAL (0- epNbY2002/05/02. CIA-RD &L LQ35W0Q0fi0WaQ0"8_ ROUTING AND RECORD SHEET STATINTL Proposed Revision o Management of Supergrade Personnel Chief, Review Staff, OP 626 C of C 24 May 1976 COMMENTS (Number each comment to show from whom to whom. Draw a line across cotumn,,after each comment.) We have reviewed your revision of our proposed regulation on super- grades, and have annotated the copy being returned with our comments. We have again revised Para b(2)(a) to a version of the original. The Agency Board reviews. OP's findings on the Agency-wide allocation and your version fuzzes this aspect. This is an important feature of the new approach and we feel it must be made clear. The annual review is targeted-to the allocation as it exists and the position requirement. which could change. it.' In para b(4) (c), please reinsert the phrase "upon receipt of sup- portiveinformation." This is very important - many requests'come without justification with subse- quent delay of months in providing the data and without this require- ment being included in the Regula- tion, 14 days could come to haunt Us. No problem with your other editin but I do note that page 1 uses 'twit. ...and the responsibilities are written as "tis." Not sure why this strikes me, but it does. I can see it both ways . . and only note to be sure it conforms to the current regulatory style (and not an abber- ation as ours often are...)