QUARTERLY REPORT OF CIA RECORDS MANAGEMENT BOARD - DISCUSSION WITH MR. BANNERMAN

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP73-00099A000200060002-0
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 6
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 30, 2002
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: July 2, 1969
• Content Type: MFR

Approved For Release 2002/ l1A-RDP73-00099A00020
25X1A
2 July 1969
25X1A
1. and I met with Mr. Bannerman on 2 July to discuss
the Quarterly Report of CIA Records Management Board dated 30 April 1969.
Mr. Bannerman structured the discussion around the list of suggestions
in paragraph 7 on pages 4 and 5 of the report. The following subpara-
graphs are numbered to correspond with the numbers of the suggestions:
a(1) Destroy unnecessary records now. As Mr. Bannerman
said, this is axiomatic.
25X1A
SUBJECT: Quarterly Report of CIA Records Management Board -
Discussion with Mr. Bannerman
a(2) Shorten scheduled storage periods. In response to
the specific question about the progress already made on this
point0 said that while it was true that we were success-
fully reducing storage periods the impact of the decisions made
was still prospective. He cited as an example the fact that
the law requires that security records be kept for thirty years,
but until recently the Office of Security had listed its records
for retention for one hundred years. They have now agreed to
reduce that period to fifty years. This is a real improvement
but, as the oldest security records on hand are about twenty
years old, it will be ten years before we reach even the legal
limit. The records people, during this ten year period, will
attempt to convince Security that a further reduction in the
retention period should be made. Mr. Bannerman requested a
memorandum (which he referred to as a "blind" memo not addressed
to anyone but set up as a reminder for him of a problem to be
solved) on the subject of unilateral decisions, such as those
made by CI Staff, which have the impact of extending periods of
storage of records. He pointed out that no unilateral decision
on the part of any component would be taken as binding but
rather would be treated as a recommendation to be accepted or
rejected by the persons in the organization with ultimate re-
sponsibility for records. (This request for an "issue" memo-
randum was the first of a number which will be mentioned in the
following paragraphs. A list of memos requested will be
appended.)
Approved For Release 2002/08/22 CIA-RDP73-00099AO00200060002-0
 SECS
Approved For Release 2002/08/22 : CIA- P73-00099AO00200060002-0
a(3) Transfer files to non-Agency jurisdictions. At
first Mr. Bannerman thought this meant the storage of Agency
files in National Archives facilities but said that what
was referred to here was a relatively limited number of non-
Agency records which had been in our possession and which could
properly be transferred to the offices of origin. He mentioned
certain Army project files as typical of this small group.
a(4) Establish positive disposal dates for all "indefi-
nite deposits". In response to a question _l agreed that 25X1
all current deposits in the Records Center had sitive dis-
posal dates and that we were talking here about deposits made
prior to 1964. Of particular concern are 30,000 cubic feet on
which only review dates have been established. The point was
made that a review date did not really give the records people
what they needed but provided a situation of considerable com-
fort to the offices responsible for the records. Mr. Bannerman
identified this as another subject on which he wanted a reminder
memorandum, a memorandum in which the responsible offices relying
upon review dates would be named so that action could be taken to
get them to establish positive disposal dates for the material.
b(l) Establish qualified RMOs to manage component records.
Cross reference was made from this suggestion to proposal number
3 on page 6 of the report. Reference was also made to the infor-
mation which had put in his separate transmittal memorandum
regarding the fact that the records of the Agency were concen-
trated in several large holdings, the responsibility of certain
Directorates or parts of Directorates. The fact that many RMOs
were only part time officers even in places where the records
holdings were quite large was discuss jjd. Mr. Bannerman requested
an issue memo on this problem. in a subsequent discussion 2 5X1A
.of proposal 3 reminded Mr. Bannerman that the DDS itself had only
a time RMO. I noted that in the transmittal memorandum
had mentioned that some criticism had been leveled at the
DDS because its commitment to the Records Program appeared to be
limited. Mr. Bannerman professed some surprise at this but indi-
cated that he would take action, to assign a Records Management
Officer to be responsible for Directorate records problems.
Whether this officer will sit on Mr. Bannerman's.immediate staff
or sit with staff was not specified. It was agreed that 25X1A
an additional position would have to be made available, however,
because there was no position available on 25X1A
also mentioned the DCI area as the other principle organizational
segment for which inadequate RMO service was available. Mr.
Bannerman requested another "issue" memorandum to remind him to
take up the problem of a DCI area RMO with John Clarke, Director
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/% a?`~ (A-RDP73-00099A000200060002-0
 Approved For Release 209 . L CIA-RDP73-00099AO00200060002-0
of PPB. During the course of this discussion on this point Mr.
Bannerman emphasized that he wants to break the records problem
into segments discussing archives, emergency records, historical
records, et rate issue. At this point the storage of
25X1A archives at came up. He mentioned that we had missed
an opportunity to use year end funds for the renovation of the
warehouse. In response to 0 comment about the
25X1A relative economy of new construction vs renovation, he pointed
25X1A
out the advantage of renovation, which would not need the special
authorization which new construction might require. We also dis-
cussed the idea that the space ati might be used for the
supplementary distribution materials now held in Suitland; Mr.
Bannerman agreed he activity of that file precluded its
transfer to
b(2) Require screening prior to retiring records to
Center. This was another point which Mr. Bannerman referred to
as axiomatic.
b(3) Apply office of record concepts to eliminate dupli-
cates. Mr. Bannerman mentioned that this was in the charter of
the Records Board. The problem is to get the offices to act in
accordance with this concept. While not specifically requesting
an "issue" memorandum on this subject Mr. Bannerman referred to
it in similar terms and I recommend that we treat it as one of
the subjects on which an issue memorandum is required.
b(4) Improve office file systems and procedures. In
this context brought up the prospective use in RI and
NPIC of movable shelving to make more efficient use of available
storage space.
b(5) Advocate fewer copies and control records creation.
Again, axiomatic. (No discussion, though with hindsight I could
wish we had pursued the point.)
b(6) Remove supplemental distribution function from the
Center. Mr. Bannerman asked what supplemental distribution was
conducted from the Center; wasn't all supplemental distribution
handled at Suitland. He was reminded that code word and top
secret supplemental distribution was not transferred to Suitland.
He wondered aloud how we had ever gotten saddled with the respon-
sibility for the distribution but did not pursue the point. He
mused about the possibility of finding the necessary 10,000
square feet of space which would be needed to transfer this
function from the Center to headquarters. The discussion was
not conclusive.
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
Approved For Release 200 M2: CIA-RDP73-00099AO00200060002-0
 Approved For Release 2002/ A-RDP73-00099AO00200060002-0
c(l) (Discussion deferred to be included with the
discussion of proposal 1, below).
c(2), (3), and (4) (Discussion postponed until dis-
cussion of proposal 4, below).
d(l) Request time extension for use of GSA Center at
Suitland. Mr. Bannerman agreed that we should. do so.
d(2) Retire selective inactive records in Federal Records
Centers and the National Archives. Mr. Bannerman requested
another "issue" memorandum requesting Office of Security review
once again its decision regarding the inappropriateness of storing
Agency records in Federal Records Centers.
25X1A
d(3) Use Federal underground storage for non-emergency
type Agency vital records. 0 said that we had approximately
2 to 3 thousand cubic feet of vital records which fell into the
non-emergency category. Mr. Bannerman included this batch of
material with that discussed under d(2) above. Both d(2) and
d(3) will be the subject of the memo regarding Office of Security
review.
d(4) Renovate space to store archives.
(This has already been discussed under b(l) above).
d(5) Build addition on Records Center Colonel
White's adamance on the point of construction was a sided to and
as the conversation was concluding was once again discussed.
Mr. Bannerman may include in his approval of funds for a feasi-
bility study a request for review of the feasibility of new
construction at the Records Center.
d(6) Rent space or store in office buildings. (We must
have touched on this lightly if at all. I don't remember the
discussion.)
2. We then moved on to a discussion of the.specific proposals
of the report. I have already covered the discussion of the Records
Management Officer problem since it related directly to the points made
under d(l) above. On the question of purchasing movable shelving for
the Records Center Mr. Bannerman indicated that he would authorize the
feasibility study and it was apparent that he was in sympathy with the
request. The point was made that this would buy us 6 years within which
to begin work on other programs which would begin to reduce the total
holdings of the Agency not only in the Records Center but in the Head-
quarters complex as well. A lengthy discussion of the fourth proposal
25X1A
25X1A
Approved For Release 200 IA-RDP73-00099AO00200060002-0
q ae~
 SECRET
Approved For Release 2002/08/22 : CIA-RDP73-00099AO00200060002-0
25X1A
on the microfilm program took place. I referred tol
memorandum on the Ocean City conference and in particular to its mention
of the fact that microform systems were pushed not as means for reducing
records bulk but as means of establishing effective control over corre-
spondence and records systems generally. To put it another way we
should not microfilm in order to save space but we can expect to save
space if we adopt an effective microfilm or microform program. Mr. Ban-
nerman seemed ready to accept this point. He said that the idea of
establishing a centralized. unit with 22 positions and 12 cameras did not
appeal to him. He would rather see the personnel requirements spread
among the several records focal points in the organization and would
prefer to see the cameras likewise scattered throughout the organization
so that the microfilming could be done at the point of origin of the
.records. He made much of the fact that, as far as he was concerned, the
records program was decentralized only to the extent necessary to permit
the creators of records to determine what should be retained and what
the retention period should be. The program should be centralized when
decisions are made regarding what storage systems are to be used. The
discussion dwelt for some time on the need for compatibility among the
microform systems and particularly the indexes to the microform systems
which would be adopted by the organization and again the need for a
strong central body was emphasized. Reference was made to earlier dis-
cussions of microforms and the stand-down on decisions on microfilming
because of the "state of the art". 0 cited several technical break- 25X1A
throughs including the elimination of the "measles" problem with micro-
film and we concluded that there was no longer any reason to defer
decision regarding an Agency microfilm program. The suggestion was
made that-it would be well to organize a team of experts, not represen-
tatives of Directorates but a group which could speak for the Agency.
Again an "issue" memo was requested which would discuss the organization
and.composition of the microform team, the period of time during which
they would work on this problem and the product which would be expected
of them. Mr. Bannerman indicated that he thought the group should be
organized and given a month to analyze the problem and come in with a
preliminary report which would among other things identify the scope of
the problem as they saw it and the period of time they thought they
would need to come up with concrete recommendations for the Agency. The
program should be undertaken not to save space but to prepare the organ-
ization to meet the increasing paper work problem of the decades ahead
and in particular to get records into a form compatible with the com-
puter and computer indexing techniques. The fact that we could save
storage space on a ratio of 100 to 1 was a happy by-product of decisions
that should be made for systems purposes.
3. The following is a list of the "issue" memorandums which Mr.
Bannerman expects:
ara ... , .n~
Approved For Release 200200'0 A-RDP73-00099A000200060002-0
 SECRET
Approved For Release 2002/08/22 : CIA-RDP73-00099A000200060002-0
a. Impact of unilateral decisions, such as those of
CI Staff, to extend retention periods on the records storage
program.
b. Extensive holdings with only "review dates", not
.retention periods.
c. Concentration of records in certain offices, some
with inadequate RMO coverage.
d. Need for a senior RMO for DCI area. Matter to be
taken up with John Clarke.
e. Storage of archives
f. Obtaining Directorate cooperation on "office of
record" practices.
g. Office of Security review of decision regarding
storage of Agency files in Federal Records Centers.
h. Establishment of an Agency Microform Working Group
(MIWOG).
ie ,
Regulations Control Staff
25X1A
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/082DP73-00099A000200060002-0
wee 't>