FUNDING OF TECHNICAL CONSULTANTS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: Library of Congress
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
• Release Decision: RIFLIM
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 11
• Document Creation Date: January 11, 2017
• Document Release Date: January 10, 2011
• Sequence Number: 10
• Publication Date: May 3, 1973
• Content Type: MEMO

A c 2 ,24,7 2176
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
1111 k. soy i*Sti)
MEMORANDUIP
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THROUGH:
FROM:
DR. KISSINGER
BRENT SCOWCROFT
PHIL ODEEN
DAVID ELLIOTT
ACTION
May 3, 1973
SUBJECT: Funding of Technical Consultants
You will recall that you approved the use by the NSC of some of the
technical consultants, fozmerly associated with OST, for expert
advice on various military problems (Tab B). We indicated we would
seek your further approval on the final details.
Contrary to our original understanding that the funds and the staff
position required for this function would be transferred from OST to
the NSC, it now develops that no funds are available and that the entire
cost, approximately $150,000, must come from the NSC budget.
There are two alternative approaches to the funding:
To ask OMB to approve an additional $150, 000 for the FY 74
NSC budget, requiring Congressional approval of a supple-
mental appropriation. (Our present FY 74 budget request on
:which Jeanne Davis testified to the House Appropriations
Subcommittee last week is $2, 802,000, an increase of $40,000
over FY 73).
-- To seek OMB permission to use some of the $300,000 requested
for contract research in FY 74 for this activity.
OMB has indicated informally at the staff level that they would recom-
mend against an increase in the NSC budget, although they do not rule
out the possibility that an appeal from you to Roy Ash might reverse
that. They would, however, view sympathetically a request for
NSS Review Completed.
-Calsi-F-144-EN-13-1*-h
GDS
ON-FILE OMB RELEASE
INSTRUCTIONS APPLY
Classified by David Elliott/Philip ?deer
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
?
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
CONFIDENTIt
permission to use contract funds. ?We recommend the latter course,
given the marginal utility of the work produced under the contractual
program and the fact that the arrangement could probably be negotiated
without your intervention.
With regard to a supergrade position for Gordon Moe, whom you had
approved in principle adding to the staff for this function, the Civil
Service Commission has agreed to provide an additional non-quota
(reserved for medical and scientific employees) supergrade position
to the NSC so it will not be necessary to use one of the position from
our present supergrade allotment.
Jeanne W. titc)6 concur s.
RECOMMENDATION:
That you approve our approach to OMB for permission to use contract
research monies to fund these technical consultants.
Disapprove
Tf y prefor to -.17.7cplegt adriitin-nn.1 funds, we have prepared a.:r6er-lo
from you to Roy Ash at Tab. A.
CONFIDENTIAL
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
t
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
?
THE WHITE HOUSE
WAS
MEMORANDUM FOR
Mr. Roy Ash
Director, Office of Manage ent and Budget
SUBJECT: FY 74 NSC Budget Incre se
In order to carry out that part of th President's Reorganization
Plan No. 1 dealing with technical vice and assessment on
military matters, I plan to use a group of consultants, 'formerly
associated with OST, to assist s in addressing these issues on an
ad hoc basis. The cost of thi= group depends on the number of
problems we might address, but a reasonable estimate of our needs
would be about $100,000 a ear, plus $50,000 to cover the necessary
C ("4 "4???
IJ LPG. J. 1.?
Since we are unable to absorb this amount in the present proposed
NSC FY 1974 budget, I would appreciate if you could take steps to
augment our budget ?y the amount so that we can perform this
important function
Henry A. Kissinger
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
."" I 6
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-40-8 >VS tern
MEMORANDA. 91/7X
NATIONAL SAuR1,1TY COUNCIL /
.L
n\-
1,4 4
Ofic",,Nt
\-
DR. KISSINGER
CONFIDENTIAL
? MEMORANDUM FOR:
FROM: tio PHIL ODEEN/DAVID ELLIOTT
ACTION
February 23, 1973
SUBJECT:
Transfer to the NSC Staff of a Technical
Assessment Capability for Military Systems
In light of your decision to transfer to the NSC staff some of the
capability previously provided by OST for technical advice and assess-
ment on military matters, we have developed some suggestions as to
size, operation, and staffing. These suggestions are based on inputs
from Jack Martin and John Bald.eschwieler of OST as well as our own
experience and ideas.
The expertise essential to the technical advisory function would be
provided (as it was in OST) by a group of technical consultants drawn
mainly from the industries and laboratories involved in the development
of military systems. By judicious selection, a group of about 20 to Z5
could have, the breadth of backgrounds and abilities necessary to address
most technical questions. The consultants as a whole would meet very
infrequently, but panels of three to five members would be formed on- an
ad hoc basis to tackle specific questions. An NSC staff member could
service the consultants. A good choice would be to add Gordon Moe to
our staff. He is experienced and well thought of in DOD and among
OST's technical consultants.
We see three general cases where we might ask consultant panels to
address an issue.
OM UV As we have in the past, the staff would periodically ask a
group of panelists to study some problem of particular concern, e. g.,
VNAF air defense capabilities, impact of. xnissile test limits, or the
shelf life of stockpiled nerve gas.
CONFIDENTIAL
6.
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
CONFID.F:NTIlt IP
-- On rare occasions, the President might ask you to take a
detailed look at a critical military problem (e. g., the survivability
of the Trident submarine or the adequacy of the B-1 bomber).
. -- Finally, the consultants could serve you directly on matters
such as SALT, since the Doty Group would likely be included in the
consultants' panel.
The extent of such studies and the requirement would vary from case
to case. But, we envisage the technical advice function as being
almost entirel responsive and not an investi ative bod out looking
for problems.
If we are to attract and hold consultants of the highest caliber, it is'
important that they feel plugged in. This means, if possible, they
should meet with you on occasion. On the other hand, it would not be
productive use of your time motivating a bunch of scientists. An
acceptable commitment might be to meet with the group as a whole a
couple times a year, spending half an hour outlining in general terms
issues on the horizon.
As fv gpia fl-tp spq cme-r1+ fil-nretiren rtural 1 y Sy"; 'al 4:11 er? 1\T
it could go into Program Analysis. or Scientific and Technological
Affairs. But our recommendation is to assign it to Dave Elliott, who could
best provide close technical supervision of the consultant panel.
RECOMMENDATION
That you approve the approach outlined above. If you approve, we will
work out the details with Jeanne Davis and Brent Scowcroft. When the
final package is complete, we would submit it for approval.
Approve.
See me
Other
V
CONFLDENTIAL
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
2.
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
11, IP
Estimate of Annual CGst tds_m)y_a,r_t_tts.vig
The group will be made up of 25 counsultants.
The cost per trip (2 days work and 1 travel) per man will
average $475.
Average air travel $ 1,75
Consulting fee 200
Per diem 75
Miscellaneous 25
$ 475
3. The group will meet semiannually as a whole.
Cost 25 x 2 x $475 $23,750
4. We will address one major. issue per year, requiring six trips
by ten consultants.
Cost $28,500
We swill address four medium-level problems per year, each
requiring four trips Gy seven consultants.
Cost $53,200
6. One NSC staff member (Gordon Moe) and one secretary to
service the group.
Cot $45,000
. Grand total $150,450
(Total w/o NSC staff cost $105,450)
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
MEMOR.ANDUP IIP
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR: MR. KISSINGER
THROUGH: GENERAL SCOWCROFT
FROM: PHIL ODEEN
DAVID ELLIOTT
SUBJECT: Funding of Technical Consultants
April 18, 1973
You will recall that you approved the use by the NSC of some of the
technical consultants, formerly associated with OST, for expert advice
on various military problems (Tab B). We indicated we would seek your
further approval on the final details.
Contrary to our original understanding that the funds and the staff position
required for this function would be transferred from OST to the NSC, it
now develops that no funds are available and that the entire cost, approx-
imately $150,000, must come from the NSC budget. Also, the GS-l6
position occupied y Cordon Mee, whom you had zIpprcveci in principle
adding to the staff for this function, must now come from the NSC
supergrade allotment.
There are two alternative approaches to the funding:
to ask OMB to approve an additional $150,000 for the FY 74 NSC
budget, requiring Congressional approval of a supplemental?
appropriation; (our present FY 74 budget request on which Jeanne Davis
testified to the House Appropriations Subcommittee last week, is
$2,802,000, an increase of $40,000 over FY 73).
to seek OMB permission to use some of the $300,000 requested for
contract research in FY 74 for this activity.
OMB has indicated informally at the staff level that they would recommend
against an increase in the NSC budget, although they do not rule out the
possibility that an appeal from you to Roy Ash might reverse that. They
would, however, view sympathetically a request for permission to use
contract funds. We recommend the latter course, given the marginal
utility of the work produced under the contractual program and the fact
that the arrangement could probably be negotiated with OMB without your
intervention.
CONFIDENTIAL/GDS
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
?
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
COiN.1.1.
.E.,1 Lem
IP
On the addition of another supergrade position for Gordon Moe, we can
arrange some trade-offs within our supergrade allotment provided the
Civil Service Commission grants our request both for restoration of the
supergrades they took from us at the time of the hiring freeze and for
the three additional supergrades. You signed a letter to CSC Chairman
Bob Hampton on this on March 29, 1973.
If CSC does not grant our request, the only solution would be to persuade
another agency -- possibly CIA -- to put Moe on their payroll and detail
him to the NSC staff. We would like your permission to approach CIA or
other agencies with this in mind if it should become necessary.
Jeanne W. Davis concurs.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That you approve an approach to OMB for permission to use contract
research monies to fund these technical consultants.
APPROVE
If you prefer to request additional funds, we have prepared a memo from
you to Roy Ash at Tab A.
2. That you authorize a request to CIA or another agency should it become
necessary, to hire .Gordon Moe and detail him to the NSC for this
activity.
APPROVE DISAPPROVE
CONFIDENTIAL/GDS
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
Li
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
THE WHITE HOUSE
WAS
MEMORANDUM FOR
Mr. Roy Ash
Director, Office of Management and Budget
SUBJECT: FY 74 NSC Budget Increase
? In order to carry out that part of the President's Reorganization
Plan No. 1 dealing with technical advice and assessment on
military matters, I plan to use a group of consultants, formerly
associated with OST, to assist us in addressing these issues on an
ad hoc basis. The cost of this group depends on the number of
problems we might address, but a reasonable estimate of our needs
would be about $100,000 a year, plus $50,000 to cover the necessary
NSC staff support.
Since we are unable to absorb this amount in the present proposed
NSC FY 1974 budget, I would appreciate if you could take steps to
augment our budget by the amount so that we can perform this
important function.
Henry A. Kissinger
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
,
4
0.0_1_ ?.7 _7 _ ? I_ _ a???
tem
MEMORANDA. 9 1/7X
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
NATIONAL S?CT_TR,1TY. COUNCIL /
? /
1,11 t ACTION
? February 23, 1973
CK
CONFIDENTIAL -4 1
1 k \" $ I
MEMORANDUM FOR: DR. ICS GER
li';'
_
FROM: VI PREL ODEEN/DAVID ELLIOTT
SUBJECT:
Transfer to the NSC Staff of a Technical
Assessment Capability for Military Systems
In light of your decision to transfer to the NSC staff some of the
capability previously provided by OST for technical advice and assess-
ment on military matters, we have developed some suggestions as to
size, operation, and staffing. These suggestions are based on inputs
from Jack Martin and John Baldeschwieler of OST as well as our own
experience and ideas.
The expertise essential to the technical advisory function would be
provided (as it was in OST) by a group of technical consultants drawn
mainly from the industries and laboratories involved in the development
of military systems. By judicious selection, a group of about 20 to 25
could have the breadth of backgrounds and abilities necessary to address
most technical questions. The consultants as a whole would meet very
infrequently, but panels of three to five members would be formed on an
ad hoc basis to tackle specific questions. An NSC staff member could
service the consultants. A good choice would be to add Gordon Moe to
our staff. He is experienced and well thought of in DOD and among
OST's technical consultants.
We see three general cases where we might ask consultant panels to
address an issue.
??? As we have in the past, the staff would periodically ask a
group of panelists to study some problem of particular concern, e. g.,
VNAF air defense capabilities, impact of. missile test limits, or the
shelf life of stockpiled nerve gas.
CONFIDENTIAL
g -S-
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24 : LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8 ,
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8
C.ONFIDENT S 111, 2
-- On rare occasions, the President might ask you to take a
detailed look at a critical military problem (e. g., the survivability
of the Trident submarine or the adequacy of the B-1 bomber).
? Finally, the consultants could serve you directly on matters
such as SALT, since the Doty Group would likely be included in the
consultants panel.
The extent of such studies and the requirement would vary from case
to case. But, we envisage the technical advice function as being
almost entirely responsive and not an investigative body out looking
for problems.
If we are to attract and hold consultants of the highest caliber, it is
important that they feel plugged in. This means, if possible, they
should meet with you on occasion. On the other hand, it would not be
productive use of your time motivating a bunch of scientists. An
acceptable commitment might be to meet with the group as a whole a
couple times a year, spending half an hour outlining in general terms
issues on the horizon.
As far as placing th. function structurally within the NSC,
it could go into Program Analysis or Scientific and Technological
Affairs. But our recommendation is to assign it to Dave ?Elliott, who could
best provide close technical supervision of the consultant panel.
RECOMMENDATION
That you approve the approach outlined above. If you approve, we will
work out the details with Jeanne Davis and Brent Scowcroft. When the
final package is complete, we would submit it for approval.
Approve ?fl
See me
Other
CONFIDENTIAL
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2013/10/24: LOC-HAK-33-5-10-8