FY-1990 INTELLIGENCE AUTHORIZATION BILL
Document Type:
Collection:
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST):
CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
Release Decision:
RIPPUB
Original Classification:
K
Document Page Count:
11
Document Creation Date:
December 27, 2016
Document Release Date:
November 15, 2012
Sequence Number:
18
Case Number:
Publication Date:
December 1, 1988
Content Type:
MEMO
File:
Attachment | Size |
---|---|
CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8.pdf | 696.84 KB |
Body:
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15: CIA-RDP90M0000514001400050018-8
STAT
STAT
STAT
STAT
1 Dec 1988
DepuIyDirectOL
for Legislation
RE: DIA, NSA, Army Intelligence Legislative
Programs
The precoordination requirements that DASD(I) is
advocating, would pretty much eliminate an
intelligence-oriented legislative program from the
Intelligence Community agencies in Defense. A least
common denominator approach, with every DoD component
effectively holding a veto, would prevent most
proposals from reaching the starting gate - including
those that have been enacted in the past. For
example, FM&P will never support a personnel related
provision unless it applies to all military or all
civilians uniformily.
We are going to continue to "work" this problem
within Defense. What I am suggesting here is that
the DCI has some interest in the disenfrancisement
of the DoD Senior Officials of the Intelli ence
Communit I sro.ose hat
and myself meet with you
and John Helgerson in the near future to bring
things into a little sharper focus than they now are.
enerai uounse
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
U -519/GC
STAT Memorandum for:
DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20340-
-
0 1 DEC 1988
Deputy Director for Legislation
Office of Congressional Affairs
Central intelligence Agency
Subject: FY-1990 intelligence Authorization Bill
Reference: Your memorandum dated 25 November 1988. subject
as above.
1. The referenced memorandum transmitted the second draft of the
FY-1990 Intelligence Authorization bill. It invites our comments
on the bill in general and with regard to certain proposals
submitted by the Defense Intelligence Agency.
2. With regard to the bill in general, we are not inclined to
question the need for legislative relief identified by our fellow
intelligence Community agencies and hdve no reason to do so in
thLs case.?. As we understand the various provisions set forth in
the draft, we do not see an adverse Impact on DIA interests.
3.- The DIA proposal that would provide for foreign language
proficiency incentive pay has been previously coordinated through
DoD, including the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Intelligence). It was forwarded by DoD General Counsel to OMB
for submission to the 100th Congress on 4 August 1988. Previous
to that, DoD supported language proficiency pay as (then) section
701 of the intelligence Authorization Act for FY-1989. It would
be Incorrect to advise the Director of Central intelligence that
DoD Is opposed to this provision. Opposition was expressed from
the Office of Force Management and Personnel, but that opposition
did not become the DoD position. We are optimistic that, In the
OMB coordination cycle on the FY-1990 intelligence Authorization
Bill, history will repeat itself - that Is, despite critical
comments from some components of DoD, the overall DoD position
will be to support this provision. We are prepared to be quite
active In support of this provision, and would appreciate the
support and leadership of the DCI. In order to be clearly
understood, let me say that we consider language proficiency pay
to be the "gold watch" of the DIA legislative program.
4. With regard to the proposal that would exclude the DIA
Director and Deputy Director and the NSA Director from Service
ceilings on flag billets, I cannot tell you that this has been
coordinated through DoD. In my discussions with a representative
of FM&P the reaction was at first very positive, inasmuch as this
proposal presented a very plausible context to do what has been
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15 : CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
STAT
championed In various other contexts In recent years. In the end,
however, the FM&P position was one of opposition. The first
consideration was that inclusion in theIntelligence Authorization
bill might appear as an end run to the Armed Services Committees.
In order to get a view on the merits, I suggested consideration of
sequential referral or Inclusion In the DOD Authorization Bill.
The response then was that this Issue of ceiling exemptions had
been a point of contention between DoD and the Congress for some
years back and no one (In FM&P) cared to revisit it again Just
now. If prior coordination means acquiring the approval of each
and every DoD component, we have struck out on FM&P. If
coordination means getting a majority or consensus of DoD
components to approve, realistically I do not believe this can be
done prior to the time the intelligence Authorization bill is sent
to the DCI. If this one is to survive, it must go forward on the
basis of intelligence Community interest.
5. Forwarded herewith Is a fuller explanation of our need for the
overseas benefits comparability provision. A believe the case for
permitting attaches to be supported with benefits comparable to
other embassy personnel Is a strong one and warrants inclusion of
this provision In the bill.
6. We continue to view the attache death gratuity proposal as a
meritorious one. As you know, however, the Congress has requested
the Department to report its views on this In the February 1989
timeframe. If one were to take an aggressive approach to seeking
enactment at the earliest possible time, it might-be argued that
the provision should be attached to a legislative vehicle that
will be taken up by the committees in the same time frame as that
In which the report will be available. However, in light of the
strength of the opposition generated by FM&P to paying the
currently authorized death gratuity to the family of Captain
Nordeen, it would be unnecessarily antagonistic to include at this
time the permanent amendment favored by DIA. If there Is a
favorable report by the Department to the Congress, we can
reintroduce the legislation In whatever form then appears
appropriate.
I Enclosure
Fuller Explanation
on the Need for
Comparability in
Attache Overseas Benefits
Genera) Counsel
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
THE NEED FOR COMPARABILITY IN OVERSEAS BENEFITS
FOR THE DEFENSE ATTACHE SYSTEM
Most military members of the DAS believe they are treated as
second class citizens because their package of benefits and
allowances does not compare favorably with that available to
Foreign Service Officers and other U.S. government civilian
employees at the same Embassy. Glaring xilscrepancles have caused
serious morale problems within Defense Attache Offices (DA0s) and
have caused a significant problem In attracting well-qualified
Individuals and retaining experienced intelligence collectors
within the DAS. Largely because of such inequities, only one
.third of DAS personnel opt to serve a repeat tour in the DAS.
Experienced personnel are the most valuable assetAn the system.
A fifty percent repeat tour rate would optimize professional' .DAS
??experience while still allowing sufficient new blood to enter
.the system so as maintain close links between attaches and the
Services they represent. Surveys of DAS personnel show that
Inequitably distributed benefits have the greatest negative
Impact on DAS morale and retention and that roughly 11 percent of
military personnel would opt for repeat tours in the DAS If
benefits for DAS members were roughly comparable to those
received by their Foreign Service and Civil Service colleagues.
DAS morale and retention problems, founded on feelings of
relative deprivation, have actually increased over the years as
the size of the DAS has shrunk. The DAS Is asked to perform more
tasks with fewer people, and these people increasingly associate
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15 : CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
with other U.S. government employees who receive substantially
greater benefits for service at the same post.
Civilian education allowances for dependent boarding schools,
paid home leave benefits, substantial foreign language
proficiency pay, substantial danger pay, and post hardship
differential pay are the overseas benefits most desired by
military members of the U.S. mission. DAS members quite
understandably would like to have these benefits, which flow
automatically to State Department and CIA personnel serving
Overseas. Discriminatory treatment has caused DAS family morale
problems which have repeatedly come to the attention of
Ambassadors, Community Liaison -Officers, and Embassy medical
specialists.
it Is, of course, very difficult to sUbstantiate the degree
to which morale and retention problems In the DAS?negatively
affect DAO mission performance. It Is clear, however, that it
takes new members of the DAS Six to twelve months on the Job to
become fully proficient. Most members of the DAS have lengthy
and expensive foreign language training and intelligence or
administration training prior to posting. In many cases attaches
have also been fully funded for area studies degrees In
preparation for attache duty. The investment In attache training
Is so great that we-need to get more than one or two years of
productive payback. We need to have at least 50 percent repeat
tours for DAS personnel, This Is not only the conclusion of DIA;
it Is also the conclusion of the Senate Select Committee on
intelligence, which has repeatedly pressed DIA to insure a
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15 : CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15 : CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
greater percentage of experienced professionals In the DAS.
Fortunately, benefits and allowances for DIA civilians
Working in the DAS are virtually identical to State Department
benefits. With the exception of schooling issues, DOD civilians
are covered by the "Standardized Regulations (Government
Civilians, Foreign Areas)."
Though Dependent Schooling for DoD
civilians Is tied to DoD Dependent Schools (DoDDs)., DIA has
already received congressional authorization to separately fund
-schooling for DAS dependents as may be made necessary by
.particular posting hardships.
The real problem is In providing comparable benefits and
allowances for military personnel and.thelr dependents In the
DAS. Existing legislation authorizes DoD to provide military
members of the DAS with some of the benefits and allowances:now
provided to State Department personnel serving overseas.
However, there is a need to obtain a more general authorization
for DoD to provide to DAS personnel in appropriate cases benefits
and allowances comparable to those received by their State
Department colleagues.
Congress his authorized several Important benefits for State
Department and DoD civilians that It has not authorized for
military members of the DAS. The first of these Is "Post
Hardship Differential Pay," an amount equal to 10, 15, 20, or 25
Percent of base pay. This additional pay is explicitly designed
as a recruitment and retention incentive for posts characterized
by extraordinarily difficult living conditions, excessive
physical hardship, or notably unhealthful living conditions (see
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
5 USC 5925). There are now 62 capital cities where U.S.
government civilian employees receive posthardship differential
pay but their military colleagues serving In the DAC) office do
not, though the military personnel and their dependents clearly
suffer identical hardships. As a result the DAS suffers
recruitment and retention problems at the 62 posts listed In
Enclosure 1. in the 1940$ Congress authorized Special Foreign
Duty Pay for military personnel (10 percent of base pay for
officers and 20 percent of base pay for enlisted personnel) as a
morale factor and' In recognition of greater-than-normal rigors of
service in particular locations. Now, however, such pay is only
available to enlisted personnel and it never amounts to more than
$22.50 per month.
A second major discrepancy In benefits exists In foreign
language proficiency pay. Uniformed military personnel may
receive only $100 per month (37 USC 316), while State Department
personnel may receive a bonus of up to 15 percent of base pay for
the identical language skill used In the same way at the same
post (22 USC 4024). In fact, 27 languages qualify for a State
Department 15 percent bonus at the S4/R4 proficiency level and
for a 10 percent bonus at the S3/R3 level.
A third major inequity relates to danger pay. For military
members hostile fire pay or imminent danger pay cannot exceed the
lowest level of hazardous duty incentive pay, currently $110 per
month (37 USC 310), while State Department personnel can receive
up to 25 percent of base pay for service In the same location (5
USC 5928).
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
A fourth major inequity In legislative authority relates to
dental care. State Department personnel and their dependents may
receive one round trip per year, plus one day per diem, for
dental care not available at a remote location (22 USC 4081).
Uniformed members of the DAS have no comparable benefit unless
the dental problem results In a medical emergency.
There are a host of small, but cumulatively significant,
discrepancies that can be ticked off:
- State Department personnel serving unaccompanied tours
In danger areas are permitted two paid round trips per year to
visit their families. Members of the DAS can only accomplish
such visits while on environmental and morale leave and could
have only a portion of their expenses reimbursed (22 USC 4081)
(8)).
- At F State Department employees have an 18,000 lb.
shipping allowance. Senior officers In the military will qualify
for this only In mid-71989, and lower ranking personnel receive
considerably less (5 USC 5724 and 5726, 22 USC 4081 (11) and (12)
versus public law 100-565 of 31 Oct 88). The shipping allowance
Is particularly important to DAS personnel in light of the
substantial representational requirements of their mission.
- State Department personnel can qualify for special
Sunday pay, no similar benefits (22 USC 3972 and 5 USC
5545/5546).
- State Department personnel can be reimbursed for
converting household appliances, obtaining new auto registration
and drivers licenses (5 USC 5924). Military personnel have no
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15 : CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
similar authorizations.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
COUNTRY
STATE DEPARTMENT
HARDSHIP POST NUMBER OF
DIFFERENTIAL MILITARY MEMBERS
RATE (%) IN THE DAO
Algeria 15 3
Bangladesh 25 2
Belize 20 2
Bolivia 25 5
Brazil 10 11
Bulgaria 15 4
Burma 25 5
Camerodn 15 3
Chad 25 3
Chile 10 8
China 20 14
Colombia 15 9
Congo 25 2
Cyprus 10 3
Czechoslovakia 10 4
Dominican Republic 20 4
Ecuador 15 7
Egypt 20 8
El Salvador 20 9
Fiji 15 2
Ghana 25 3
Guatamala 15 5
Haiti 25 3
Honduras 20 9
India 15 11
Indonesia 15 10
Iraq 25 2
Ivory Coast 15 6
Jamaica 15 3
Jordan 10 5
Lebanon 25 3
Liberia 25 6
Madagascar 25 2
Malawi 10 2
Malaysia 10 6
Mexico 10 13
Mozambique 25 2
Nepal 15 2
Nicaragua 25 5
Nigeria 25 4
Oman 20 5
Pakistan 20 9
Panama 10 5
Paraguay 10 2
Peru 10 9
Philippines 15 11
Poland 15 4
Romania 15 4
ENCLOSURE 1
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15 : CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8
Saudi Arabia
20
9
Senegal
15
3
Somalia
25
6
Sri Lanka
25
3
Sudan
25
3
Surinam
20
3
Syria
25
3
Thailand
10
12
Tunisia
10
5
Turkey
10
12
USSR
25
15
Yemen
25
3
Zaire
20
8
Zimbabwe
10
2
TOTAL 346
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/11/15: CIA-RDP90M00005R001400050018-8