Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 12, 2016
Document Release Date: 
July 30, 1998
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
March 17, 1967
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP85G00105R000100130018-1.pdf179.04 KB
Approved For Release 2002/06/18 : CIA-RDP85G00105R000100130018-1 17 March 1967 MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director for Intelligence SUBJECT . Inspector General's Report on Foreign Intelligence Collection Requirements 1. There are two attachments to this memorandum. One contains the comments of the Directorate on the 20 recommendations (of a total of 27 in the survey) addressed. to you. I believe no general comment is needed beyond. that given in the proposed. memorandum of transmittal to Admiral Taylor (also attached.) and. in Ed's interim report to the Admiral on 4 March. 2. Comments were prepared. initially by the members of the DDI review team working separately on assigned. recommendations. Following that, a joint meeting of the team was held. and, the version that came out that session was sent to all office directors and staff chiefs for review. The comments that I propose you forward to Admiral Taylor reflect most of the suggestions resulting from that review. There are no reservations or substantive exceptions on the part of any office to the restatements and. comments in the attachment. 3. The first two pages of the attachment summarize the comments and indicate the nature of the restatements, recommendation by recom- mendation. 4. Twelve of the 20 recommendations concern organizational re- lationships and. responsibilities in the collection requirements field.. The basic problems are three--to relate the responsibilities of the Collection Guidance Staff to the intelligence producing offices of DDS&T; to define the authority of the Chief, Collection Guidance Staff; and. to find practical ways to enable line officials--office directors and. division chiefs--in DDI and. DDS&T to meet their responsibilities in the collection guidance process. By combination and. restatement, we have reduced the twelve recommendations to eight. Foremost among these are Recommendations Nos. 8 and. 26. 5. Recommendation No. 8 in its original form simply calls for you, together with Carl Duckett, to issue a mission-and.-functions statement for CGS in the same terms for each Directorate. Recommendation No. 26 Approved For 105R000100130018-1 Approved For Release 2002/06/18 : CIA-RDP85G00105R000100130018-1 A ~ ONLY suggests that you "furnish all necessary support" to CGS as it goes about righting the accumulated, wrongs of two The team believed. that these two recommendations should. be put together and that the naked hopes should. be clothed. with the means to do some- thing. 6. You will note that our approach throughout is based. on the assumption that DDS&T will agree to have its offices enter into a normal, cooperative, and constructive relationship on collection guidance matters with CGS. This is so fundamental to so many of the recommendations that, if DDS&T were not to cooperate, I doubt the feasibility of the Agency progressing much beyond. the situation de- scribed. in the survey. 7. I dontt know what DDS&T's position on the survey is. There may be some feeling that DDS&T ought to establish its own collection guidance staff. If so, I think this would. be a mistake. We propose instead, in the combined. Recommendation No. 8 and. 26, to establish a Collection Guidance Advisory Group to advise Mr. Hitchcock. Its members would be the Deputy Directors (or their representatives) of FMSAC, OBI, OCI, ONE, ORR, and OSI, with Chief, CGS, in the chair. With such a group in operation, the producing offices of both DDI and DDS&T could. have a direct and, continuing voice in CGS activities as it set about "mitigating deleterious effects" and. "applying strict selective criteria." CGS in turn would. have a regular forum for bringing to the attention of management at an effective level the problems or difficulties it was encountering. 8. CGS clearly cannot be given a charter that would. allow it to substitute its judgment for that of line officials on a no-questions- asked, basis. Even if you were willing to entertain that approach in the DDI, it would kill any prospect of DDS&T cooperation in the col- lection guidance process. What we can d.o--and. the combined. restate- ment does this--is to spell out explicitely the CGS Chief's authority to go to office directors or to you and Carl Duckett with his recom- mendations for corrective action where he feels that is necessary. 9. The other major recommendations in this category are Nos. 24 and. 25. As originally set forth, they require you and Carl Duckett to instruct the chiefs of substantive divisions and. the directors of substantive offices to "assume" a detailed list of responsibilities. In restating these two recommendations as one, we d.o not attempt to argue the desirability of all the "responsibilities" the survey group would. impose on these managers. Instead., the restatement shifts the focus for action to Chief, CG.S, and the Advisory Group, and charges them with "devising and, implementing practical measures to assist the A Yap %%L . ULT. Wh Approved For Release 2002/06/18 : CIA-RDP85GO0105R000100130018-1 Approved For Release 2002/06/18 : CIA-RDP85G00105R000100130018-1 1. " 6UY L 20r L 61P ..., ~ ~ directors of the substantive offices and. their division chiefs in carrying out their responsibilities..." The listings of the original recommendations can serve as guidelines to a methodical attack on the problems of management raised by the survey. 10. In restating most of the other recommendations--Nos. 6, 7, 10/11/12 (combined. as one), 13, 1)+, and. 27--that fall in this category, we have incorporated the concept of collaborative action between Chief, CGS, and. the Advisory Group. 11. Of the survey's seven recommendations not originally for DDI action, three are for the DDP, two for the DDS&T, and, two for the CIA SIGINT Officer. The DDI will be affected. by the action taken on some of these. For example, the DDP must undertake considerable work in connection with No. 3--concerning DCID 5/5 and. the Interagency Proprity Committee--before we can do much about No. 4. So far, however, we have had. no formal contact with either DDP or DDS&T representatives and. do not know what comments they have made on the survey or on individual recommendations. 12. The team members and I will be happy to meet with you at your convenience on the survey and. the comments we propose you send. to Admiral Taylor. Attachments: 1. Comments of the Intelligence Directorate on certain recommendations in the IG Survey 2. Memorandum for Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Approved For 94Y00105R000100130018-1