WORKING GROUP FOR STRATEGIC PLANNING MINUTES MEETING OF 1 DECEMBER 1982

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP84M00396R000300010004-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 7
• Document Creation Date: December 20, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 16, 2008
• Sequence Number: 4
• Publication Date: December 21, 1982
• Content Type: REPORT

Approved For Release 2008/01/16: CIA-RDP84M00396R000300010004-3
21 December 1982
WORKING GROUP FOR STRATEGIC PLANNING
MINUTES
Meeting of 1 December 1982
1. The first meet* of the Working Group for Strategic Planning was
held on 1 December 1982, 25X1
opened the meeting with introductory remarks on the success that
the Intelligence Community has enjoyed with the 1985 Intelligence Capabilities 25X1
Study, particularly in the role that the study played in development of the
DCI's Goals and Objectives statement and in the FY-84 budget guidance. He 25X1
emphasized the importance of the 1985 Capabilities Study by pointing out that
the addition of some new people into the Community work force could be
attributed to recommendations made by the study working group.F__1 25X1
2. The Chairman of the Working Group,l I spoke next on the
subject of the Executive Steering Group meeting of 23 November, noting that a
copy of the agenda and issue papers presented at the Executive Steering Group
meeting were available for members of the Working Group. outlined 25X1
the general approach that would be taken in updating the 1985 Intelligence
Capabilities Study. He identified the following major excursions from the
original effort as follows:
o The Working Group would not duplicate last year's total effort;
changes to the basic challenges and improvements, programmed and
additive, would be by exception.
Specific tasks to be accomplished by the Working Group are as follows:
o The Intelligence producers Council (IPC) has been tasked with
reviewing and prioritizing the ten substantive challenges for the
Working Group; Working Group members are invited to review the IPC
list, coordinate within their respective organizations, and be
prepared to comment on the proposed ranking order at the next
meeting.
o The Working Group as a body will determine the relative ranking of
the three non-substantive challenges.
o The Working Group will review the overall health of the Community's
throughput process. OPBC will present an initial assessment based
on the recent budget review. Two time frames will be considered,
now and at that time when significant additional capability will
become operational. Members may provide separate inputs to OPBC if
SECRET
Approved For Release 2008/01/16: CIA-RDP84M00396R000300010004-3
 Approved For Release 2008/01/16: CIA-RDP84M00396R000300010004-3
desired, and will review and comment on the OPBC presentation prior
to presentation to the ESG and NFIB.F__~ 25X1
3. The opening presentation was followed by questions concerning the
nature of the OPBC presentation and relationship of the Capabilities Study to
the DCI's Goals and Objectives statement. The focus of concern was whether or
not significant changes were anticipated in the forthcoming Goals and
Objectives, (No major changes anticipated) and even whether or not they would
be coordinated throughout the Community. Dick Mosier, the representative from
DUSD(P) questioned the relationship of the Goals and Objectives statement to
the planning under way by COMIREX and the SIGINT Committee, and urged
consistency in the Community planning process. He was assured that both
Committees were fully involved in the updating process. Mr. Mosier asked for
a definition of ties among the Capabilities Study, the Goals and Objectives
statement and the DCI's fiscal guidance. The Chairman advised that such a
definition would be addressed at a future meeting of the Working Group.= 25X1
4. Questions were raised by several members of the Working Group as to
the extent to which the NFIP actually adheres to the DCI's Goals and
Objectives statement and the Program and Budget Guidance, and who in the
Community is responsible for monitoring the programs, their performance and
how closely they follow Community planning recommendations. The Chairman
responded that we, the Community, lack a formal measurement process for
deriving this information, and that no one has volunteered to accomplish the
task. He added that we get reactions from the NFIB, from the NFIC, and from
the Congress, but that we lack an institutional mechanism to systematically
perform this task. DIA, commented that the same problem existed 25X1
within DIA and that it proved very troublesome. The Chairman commented that
despite these deficiencies the system works quite well, noting that the
guidance is generally a broad approach to the subject rather than precise
directions. He added that the a major thrust of our effort was to determine
how well the Community is doing, and that this type of information was needed
by the National Security Advisor and the National Security Council.
5. noted an apparent lack of quantitative relationship 25X1
between needs and what is collected. Dick Mosier responded that while a
variety of ad hoc groups were trying to solve this problem in a piecemeal
fashion, the Office of Plannin was trying to develop a more organized,
structured approach. also noted that the members of the Planning 25X1
Working Group should be looking beyond 1990, well out beyond the budget and
programming five year period, to consider how to translate the role of the
Working Group from preparing a unconstrained budget wish list to actually
accomplishing long-range planning within predictable resource limitations. He
stressed that the entire group must gain a better understandin of the
individual and group roles in the long-range planning effort 25X1
6. The proposed prioritization of the ten substantive challenges was
presented to the Working Group by the IPC representative. The 25X1
legitimacy of the IPC as an Intelligence Community authority for the
prioritization of the substantive challenges was questioned by the DUSD(P)
representative, Dick Mosier. The concerns of Gen. Richard Stilwell, DUSD(P),
about the breadth of the IPC were voiced. Mr. Mosier questioned who had
participated in the IPC's efforts, and was advised that the priorities
presented were drafted by the IPC staff and coordinated with CIA, NSA and
Approved For Release 2008/01/16: CIA-RDP84M00396R000300010004-3
 Approved For Release 2008/01/16: CIA-RDP84M00396R000300010004-3
.0 1- VINI_ I
State/INR; DIA had not responded by the date of the meeting. Mr. Mosier again
pointed out that a major part of the Intelligence Community--the military--had
not participated in the process. The Chairman noted that this issue had
surfaced at the ESG meeting and was under discussion by the DDCI and the
DUSD(P). He then invited to provide the Working Group members 25X1
with a brief description and history of the IPC and its evolving role within
the Intelligence Community. Following this presentation, the discussion moved
on to consider the list of challenges and the priorities. noted 25X1
that the IPC had refocused one of the challenges from a comprehensive data
base issue to a look at the Third World including analysis as well as
collection.) 25X1
7. Questions were raised about the many issues which were not included
in the original study. The DIA representative pointed out Defense's need to 25X1
provide tactical support to military commanders and the priority need by the
Department of Defense for tactical (war-fighting) intelligence
SECRET
Approved For Release 2008/01/16: CIA-RDP84M00396R000300010004-3
 Approved For Release 2008/01/16: CIA-RDP84M00396R000300010004-3
JCI.RCI
23 December 1982
MEMORANDUM FOR: Working Group for Strategic Planning
FROM: Chairman
SUBJECT: Minutes of 9 December Meeting
1. The second meeting of the Working Group for Strategic Planning was
held on 9 December at the The purpose of the 25X1
meeting was to hear a presentation on the relationship of the 1985
Intelligence Capabilities Study to the DCI's Goals and Objectives and Program
and Budget Guidance, to review the IPC's prioritization of challenges and to
prioritize the three non-substantive challenges. A list of attendees is
attached. 25X1
2. The Chairman opened the meeting with an apology to the Working Group,
noting that the subject of the relationship of the 1985 Intelligence
Capabilities Study to the DCI's Goals and Objectives, COMIREX and SIGINT
Committee Guidance and to Program and Budget Guidance proved to be a more
complex issue than originally thought. He said that a briefing on the subject
was being prepared and would be presented at a future meeting.
3. Considerable discussion again took place concerning the role of the
IPC in prioritizing the ten substantive intelligence issues identified in the
1985 Capabilities Study. Both the DIA and DUSD(P) representatives questioned
the origin of the IPC initiative in this regard. They were advised by the
Chairman that this issue was raised at the Executive Steering group meeting of
23 November, and that the DDCI, John McMahon, had designated the IPC as the
leader in this role. He also noted that the DUSD(P) representative, General
Stilwell, had not fully concurred in this decision, but as previously noted
the subject was under active consideration by the DDCI. The DIA
representative continued to question the ability of the IPC to adequately
represent the Intelligence Community, both from an organizational and a
staffing standpoint. The Chairman noted that the IPC was expected to alert
the DCI to major intelligence gaps. This was followed by a discussion in
which DIA concerns were aired about the narrow scope of the IPC, and their
inability to adequately cover all issues. The Chairman responded that this
was an institutional issue, that the IPC would be used where possible, but
that other ad hoc groups would continue to play a role in this regard. He
stressed that he was interested in Community-wide issues, and that specific
Program issues would continue to be the responsibility of the individual
Program Managers. He further added that this Working Group was to be
concerned with long-range planning issues, and that mechanisms existed to work
the shorter range problems. The DIA representative questioned whether the
challenges were to continue to be broad, or to be more narrowly focused., The
Approved For Release 2008/01/16: CIA-RDP84M00396R000300010004-3
 Approved For Release 2008/01/16: CIA-RDP84M00396R000300010004-3
Chairman responded that he wanted to keep the issues as broad as possible in
order to leave the Program Managers as much flexibility as possible. The
question of how to dispose of specific issues was also discussed in general
terms.
4. The matter of the priority listing prepared by the IPC was
addressed. The value of the IPC list was again questioned by the DIA
representative, noting that it lacked a DIA input. The discussion turned to
the value of prioritization, and the effect that such prioritization would
have on the programmatic process. The DIA representative also questioned the
route that a final report would take, and how it would be used; the role or
lack thereof NFIB/NFIC participation was noted. The Chairman noted the long
standing plan to have the NFIP review the report and then inquired whether any
of the members had any changes or additions to the basic list of challenges.
The IPC member circulated a list of recommended rewrites for five of the
challenges. The DIA representative questioned the number of challenges that
were to be considered, how often they would change and how frequently the list
would be reviewed. The definition of challenge 6, Comprehensive Data Base,
and the IPC's recusting of the challenge as a Third World issue was raised
along with a question as to the value of including individual regional issues
(such as the Caribbean Basin). The Chairman explained that the Caribbean
Basin was a specific issue considered separately by the Executive Steering
Group and assigned to the Director, Intelligence Community Staff for
resolution. He further added that most regional issues would be subsumed
under one or another of the ten substantive challenges. 25X1
5. The DIA representative questioned the need to update the 1985
Capabilities Study, noting that the document served a specific marketing
purpose. He was joined by the CIA representative who agreed that an
assessment of Community progress was really needed. The Chairman stated that
the Director, Office of Program and Budget Coordination was preparing in
assessment of how the Community had addressed the additive improvement in the
current budget as a part of the presentation discussed earlier. He also noted
that the world situation was relatively static, and that a detailed review of 25X1
the challenges would not be necessary on an annual basis but that the
Community should be alert to emerging issues within those challenges on a
continuing basis.
Approved For Release 2008/01/16: CIA-RDP84M00396R000300010004-3
 Approved For Release 2008/01/16: CIA-RDP84M00396R000300010004-3
8. The IPC member noted that there was a need for the Working Group
members to go back to their respective offices and study the entire Community
planning process to gain a better understanding of what the Working Group was
trying to achieve. The Chairman added that it would be beneficial for the
Working Group, as a whole, to understand the approaches some relatively new,
taken by the various Program Managers to long-range planning. He commented on
the changing NSA approach to the problem brought out in a recent briefing, and
asked for similar presentations to be given to the Working Group at their next
meeting. Following discussion by the group on the modality of such
presentations, it was agreed that NSA, Air Force, and the ICS' SIGINT and
COMIREX Committees would brief on their long-range planning efforts with
regard to the CCP and NRP at the next scheduled meeting. CIA and Defense were
asked to prepare similar briefings for the meeting following the CCP/NRP
9. The meeting concluded in the Christmas Spirit with all holding hands
Attachment:
a/s
SECRET
Approved For Release 2008/01/16: CIA-RDP84M00396R000300010004-3
 Approved For Release 2008/01/16: CIA-RDP84M00396R000300010004-3
Working Group for Strategic Planning
9 December 1982 Meeting
List of Attendees
NSA
Navy/ONI
IPC
ICS/COMIREX
CIA
DUSD(P)
SAF SS
DIA
State/INR
Commerce
Energy
Treasury
SECRET
Approved For Release 2008/01/16: CIA-RDP84M00396R000300010004-3