DIA/CIA SEPARATION PLAN

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90G00993R000300190012-1
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: December 27, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 1, 2012
• Sequence Number: 12
• Publication Date: May 8, 1987
• Content Type: MISC

Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/05/01 :CIA-RDP90G00993R000300190012-1
ROUTING AND RECORD SHEET
STAT
STAT
STAT
STAT
sue~ecT: (opfionol)
PBX and SAFE Issues
Chief, Customer Service Group
2D0117 HQ
TO: (OAie~r daiynofbn, room number, and
buildinp~
1. D OIT
2D00 HQ
OFFICER'S
INITIALS
14 Maw 1987
COMMENTS (Numbs Hoch eomm~M fo show from whom
b whom. D-ow a ling ocro+i column afM loch eomm~nf.)
talked to me on
Thursday about some PBX issues
and also some SAFE issues:
1) OIR's concerns about the
plans for SAFE CIA and DIA
separation, and 2) Concerns
about cost growth in '87
(since April ~2 million).
Ron left these two (attached)
memos which he wants to
discuss with you on Monday.
(He is scheduled to see you
Monday at 11:30.)
I did not pursue the SAFE
issues.
FORM 61 Q ~T~ ~ u.f. asoanm~nt Prlntlnf OMIw: 1!!f-4/4?g4/4!1!!
1-79
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/05/01 :CIA-RDP90G00993R000300190012-1
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/05/01 :CIA-RDP90G00993R000300190012-1
STAT
STAT
Note for: D/OIT May 8,1987
From: D/OIR
Subject:DIA/CIA Separation Plan
The factors listed below are intended to serve only as a
starting point for thinking about the separation issue.
Clearly OIT can decide the scope and duration of technical
We met on 8 May with to discuss in general terms
what to do about separation. s a result of that session, he
will try to define what DIA needs from CIA ($,technical
support, AIM support, etc.) to effect separation. He will
get back to us in a couple of weeks.
Over the next two months it will be necessary, I believe, to
have several sessions among DIA, OIT, and OIR to iron out
differences, or at least to delineate differences for our
bosses. Those sessions should include people only up to our
level. I think we should not involve the DDA and the DDI
until we have a specific plan or a set of options for their
consideration.
The following factors should be incorporated in a separation
plan:
o The lim' n of CIA funds for DIA unique
development is in FY88. That ends any CIA
financial support to D
o The separation must take place at the earliest
possible date -- no later than the start of FY88. This means
that two CSPO organizations are necessary, one for the DOD
and one for the CIA.
o The separation plan may extend the support required
from OIT beyond FY88. oIT is willing to dedicate the
resources it currently has invested in CSPO and in systems
programming resources in order to expedite the separation
date.
o The consideration of core software may be negotiated
in order to expedite separation. However, there must be a
CIA plan to reduce the actual amount of software that is
jointly controlled with the objective of moving away from
any jointly controlled software (so called "core") by the
end of FY88.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/05/01 :CIA-RDP90G00993R000300190012-1
 _ Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/05/01 :CIA-RDP90G00993R000300190012-1
NOTE T0: Edward J. Maloney
Ed, I have provided both you and Frank with a draft concept where the
goal of separation was to make both Agencies self-sufficient. I have
attached some discussion points and a draft concept which I believe
represents a win-win way out of this mess. I have tried to be
objective, but it is not a popular position these days. Anyhow, what
follows is the "other" alternative which, I think recognizes political
reality higher than both Agencies' desires. Be interested in your
thoughts.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/05/01 :CIA-RDP90G00993R000300190012-1
 _ Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/05/01 :CIA-RDP90G00993R000300190012-1
o Current SAFE Architecture cannot support required availability and
performance. Reasons: AIM, INQUIRE, Complexity
o Current SAFE Architecture is on trailing edge of technology
o Current SAFE Architecture mandates sole source support for:
- LOGICON -- 98~ Of All SAFE Applications Code
- INFODATA -- INQUIRE with endless stream of perfomance enhancements
- NSEG -- AIM with endless stream of performance enhancements
STAT
o Current SAFE Architecture mandates long term relationship with DIA
AIM Main Driver, but a bug here is a bug there and/or vice versa
o As more analysts are exposed to SAFE, SAFE becomes a necessary tool
o SAFE Delivery 3+ will serve) analysts at both Agencies. Demand
will be high for connectivity, performance, and availability.
OIR FACT
o Yet, see first bullet
o Both Agencies, therefore, will have to pour funds into improving
connectivity, performance, and availability. These improvements
will come at the expense of functionality, but will never achieve
acceptable levels. These improvements for the most part are not
site-unique.
o Therefore, movement toward a new SAFE architecture will commence
at both Agencies. This will be very expensive.
o Oversight groups will once again insist on point venture. This
time their case will be stronger as SAFE will already be in 3-4
locations with over 9096 common code.
CONCLUSION: Total separation really makes no sense and, in fact, will
most likely be prevented by oversight groups.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/05/01 :CIA-RDP90G00993R000300190012-1
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/05/01 :CIA-RDP90G00993R000300190012-1
o Recognize that Delivery 3+ is point baseline and that both Agencies
will always be customers of this system as long as requirements exist.
o End cost-sharing for Delivery 4.0 ASAP.
o Rename and return Delivery 4.0 to DIA. Develop ICD between SAFE and
IDB (Delivery 4.0)
o Establish funding profiles and cost accounting systems which will
allow each Agency chance to either ,jointly or singly fund enhancements
depending on need.
o Establish CM plan and management approach to allow Agency-unique
or ,joint development ventures.
o Begin serious look at a new SAFE architecture.
o Move CSPO out of CIA Building into "neutral" space requiring
only one set of Agency clearances.
o Rotate CSPO Directors every two years between Agencies or move
permanently to IC Staff.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/05/01 :CIA-RDP90G00993R000300190012-1