REVIEW OF REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE INTEGRATED INFORMATION SYSTEM PROJECT (PHASE II) WITH (Sanitized)

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: NGA Records (Formerly NIMA)
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP78B04747A001900040036-9
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 11
• Document Creation Date: December 28, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 11, 2001
• Sequence Number: 36
• Publication Date: October 3, 1966
• Content Type: MF

Appr6QrOD~ RWease 2002/01/29: CIA-RDP78BO4747
3 October 1966
SUBJECT : Review of "Request for Approval of the Inte rated
Ill With
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Planning, Programming, and ~udgeting
25X1
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
Funding
REFERENCES (a) Memo from Acting DD/I, dated 21 September 1966
(b) Staff Study -- For Phase II IIS of 27 July 1966
(c) -Phase I Study, "NPIC Review and Functional
Flow', of 3 June 1966
(d) -Phase I Study. "Conceptual Design and
Functional Specifications, " 19 August 1966
(e) R&D Catalog, IIS of 27 July :966 -- Revised
(Tab A)
(f) Phase I St,,xdy, "Pro,rang Implemnentation
Plan, " 19 Augt~s) L,
(g) -.2roposai .:ane :5, 1966,
"'Attachment"')
from Dom, O :, -.. per 1966
vi #'no from Ch"c:, Processing
( (.. . ' NPIC, 16 Septernb....
SUMMARY
The Integrated rmalon. System (IIS) is a project to prow-de NPIC
with the following s y: - am capabilities and ADP support:
Information Storage. a-c.. Retrieval (an.`-!o; ..a.rxing) of mage
and non-image data.
-- A large intel = base
Computer ass ansuration and metric< ,zput4 -. ns
Photo lnterpr..-or On-line data base and computa c.CL ccess
- Report generation
fission coverage plots
DECLASS REVIEW by NIMA/DOD
Approved For Release 2002/01/29 CIA-RDP78 C~aetrbl`biito~nt~ 04003.6-9
SECRET dotirngradlng and
dcclnssWcat on
 SECRET
Approved For Release 2002/01/29 CIA-RDP78B04747A001900040036-9
-- Document control
-- Statistics generation
-- Conversion of graphic and textual material to machine readable
form
Compatibility with inter- and intra-agency systems
1. A first consideration is the question of NPIC's need for such a
system. This need is adequately documented in references (a), (b), (c),
and (d). In addition, NPIC, Acting DD/I, OCS and the Information Processing
Staff are in strong agreement on the real need for such a system, and of
its great and essential value to the Agency. Need is therefore not in
doubt.
The questions which are far more difficult and controversial, but
essential to intelligent decision, are:
-- What kind of a system? Define it!
-- How is it developed? Where is a comprehensive System Development
Plan?
-- By which contractors is it developed? Is -best qualified? 25X1A
Or even minimally qualified?
-- How should the Agency proceed?
2. Phase I of this project was an Analysis and Functional Concept study
performed by for 25X1A
and completed in August.
Phase II of this project would be a System Design study covering:
-- Alternate methods
System Description
Component Specification
- - Implementation Plan
-2-
Approved For Release 2002/01/29 : CIA-RDP78B04747A001900040036-9
IM,
:T
 Approved For Release 2002/01/29 : CIA-RDP78B04747A001900040036-9
25X1A
Cost of Phase II study would be S requiring eight and one-
half months. No indication is provided of work breakdown packages for
Phase II, or how these add up to - Costs are shown by total 25X1A
hours and rates.
Phase III is called "System Engineering Procurement" and requires
twelve and one-half months. Cost of
nor software) is estimated at
portion of Phase III (no equipment
25X1A
25X1A
Phase IV is called "System Installation and Test, " and requires
four months in the -schedule. Cost of _portion of Phase IV (nQ5X1A
equipment nor software) is estimated at $ Descriptions, 25X1A
definitions, procedures, methods and work breakdown packages for
Phases III and IV are completely ignored. This is remarkable for a
project of this complexity and magnitude. It implies that will 25X1A
consider phases III and IV when they come to them. This is a drastic
and amateurish departure from accepted professional practice and system
methodology. At this stage we cannot expect precise solutions to all
problems, but we should insist upon a comprehensive, total system
approach, a reasonable development plan, problem and task identification,
demonstration of a convincing working approach to problem solution, and
directly related technical experience.
25X1A 25X1A
3. Reference (a) states the cost of Phases I through IV will total2cX1A
This is for he _ 1 t h .t only,,,, which a proxir ates wha
is usually called the "system engineering and technical direction" role.
Iprovi:des analysis, esi.gn, study and similar functions, but does
cover costs of hardware nor programming. =estimates (reference (d), X
page 75) that personnel, hardware and programming tc provide the operating
system would cost an additional per year for the, first five years
and approximately per year t ereafter. Total 5-year cost of
the IIS is thus approximately A 25%
to 50% overrun of this amount would not be surprising. Initial operating
capability is scheduled for 1968 and system completion for 1971. 25X1A
Reference (e) lists 1967 funding as (for Phase II) anc25X1A
FY 1968 funding as -, presumably. partial funding for Phase III.
LEVA,~T COMMENTS
1. The 11'S is a large, complex, ambitious and important, long-term
system. Although described as using "current state of the art, " or "off the
Approved For Release 2002/01/29 : CIA-l P78B04747A001900040036-9
SECRET
 25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/01/29 : CIA-RDP78B04747A001900040036-9
shelf hardware, " the system integration and interface problems are very
complex and are in reality feasible but advanced techniques. It would
be'the largest, most complex ADP system yet undertaken by the Agency,
and one of the most advanced intelligence and image interpretation systems
attempted by anyone.
2. The available documentation of the IIS project (references (a) through
(i)) does not present a comprehensive, clear, precise, nor adequately
detailed project plan. Available studies and plans do not adequately describe;
what the Agency is getting, nor where, when and how. Phases III and IV
equipment procurement, software development and sub-contractor roles are
ignored, or treated with the vaguest of generalities.
3. Many important system elements, considerations and problems
are omitted or glossed-over in the _ study. This superficiality suggests
lack of-appreciation of many critical technical and system problems5X1A
For example, NPIC has ordered two UNIVAC 494 computers for deliver
in October 1966 and July 1967. These are completely ignored in the ?
studies. These two computers represent a powerful hardware capability.
Will some or all of their capacity be available for IIS? Will they be the
IIS computers? Why, how, why not? Will they be replaced by IIS?
4. No consideration is given to problems, methods or procedures
for managing the development of this system. For a system of this
complexity and magnitude, involving a number of sub-contractors for
individual items of hardware and software, comprehensive management
techniques are essential.
5. There are numerous statements and planning elements in the
studies and Phase II Proposal (references (d), (f), and (g)) which
seem unrealistic, inaccurate or just plain wrong. Cumulatively these
produce grave doubt about the professional competence of 25X1A
6. The =Proposal for Phase II, reference (g), consists of just
seven pages and nine resumes of personnel. This is a grossly inadequate
description of the work to be performed in Phase II. The nine resumes
presented contain systems experience mainly in meteorological systems25X1A
IK.. ?pears that the is mainly
a ,enter for processing (internal, business) daEa
rd that the Information and Environmental Systems Department is a 25
?oup with some weather system experience. Ten additional names of
with no resumes of experience
nnel are listed
t
d
,
perso
contrac
apose
25X1A
ovided.
There is no proposal section listing any description of = the
or their facilities, organization, or equipment.
..4,
Approved For Release 2002/01/29 : CIA-RDP78B04747A001900040036-9
 ~ U111
Approved For Release 2002/01/29 : CIA-RDP78B04747A001900040036-9
There is no "Related Experience" section to the proposal, nor any indication
25X1A that is qualified by past experience in information processing, ADP,
Intelligence Systems, photo processing and interpretation, system
engineering, equipment test and integration, management of hardware
and software sub-contractors, technical direction of system development,
programming, computer and peripheral hardware or any of the other
essential skills.
25X1A What has ever done in these areas before?
25X1A Why should we think that is the best qualified contractor for this
task? Surely not just because they performed a-study, which 25X1A
document is impressive only for its deficiencies.
7. The time schedule for Phases III and IV, pages 7 and 8 of reference
), is grossly unrealistic. For example, "begin procurement of standard
equipment 6 February 67"; "begin test of standard equipment 8 May 67"
(this is a nine to twelve-month, not a three-month, item); "begin test
plan 23 October 67"; "complete 22 December 67" (but equipment tests
started five months before the test plan was started). There are many
similar departures from reality.
8. In contrast to the unanswered question about - experience 25X1A
! and competency, the acknowledged 'skilled and experienced leaders who
could work this project include:
Information processing (.ADP) systems design and implementation
companies
25X1A
25X1A
Photo Interpretation and Processing Systems companies
Approved For Release 2002/01/29 : CJA-RDP78B04747A001900040036-9
 SLlAt L I
Approved For Release 2002/01/29 : CIA-RDP78B04747A001900040036-9
Directly related experience of these companies on projects very similar
to the IIS includes:
The USAF Mobile Wing Reconnaissance Technical System
The Navy Integrated Operational Intelligence System
The Army Operations Center System
The Naval Reconnaissance Technical Support System
The Air Wing ELINT Processing System
The Fleet Intelligence Center System,
and many other military systems of the type, magnitude and complexity
of the IIS.
These companies have been the route and they know the hard places.
They have vastly greater experience, skills, facilities and technical
competence to applyto the IIS, than has 25X1A
9. Reference (h) expresses some misgivings about the approach
and technical depth of the studies. Reference (i) is a reply to t. ese comments.
10. The preceding comments have concentrated on deficiencies in the
-study for development of the ITS, because it is the deficiencies which
could jeopardize successful system development. ".here are also
favorable comments which can be made regarding the study.
The most significant of these comments is that references (c)
and (d) constitute the basis for a definition or specification of the
functional requirement for an IIS. Reference (f) is entirely inadequate
as a "Program Implenientation Plan" and the "Conceptual Design" of
reference (d) is deficient, but we do have the basis for specification of
the functional requirement, and this is valuable and useful.
11. The -study is so inadequate that a very lengthy, paint
by point, specific analysis of errors, omissions and deficiencies
could be made. The above sampling is probably sufficient to justify
very serious doubt about approving the Phase II contract, and concern
over the entire method of proceeding with IIS development.
SCUSSION
1. Since the need for an IIS system is clear and agreed, an effort
should be made to correct the deficiencies in the present a ;-,roach and
proceed with system development. A main deficiency -L.--at we do not
have a tota-- system development plan. Such a plan is F _,sential to an 25X1A
orderly, well rran~.ryed effort; without such a plan we v c. ,id 'ae proceeding
in a "play it by ear mode, and that will not work for the LIS $
symphony.
Approved For Release 2002/01/29 : CIA-(XDP78B04747A001900040036-9
SECRET
 E f d
UYCL.fi
Approved For Release 2002/01/29 CIA-RDP78BO4747AO01900040036-9
A second major deficiency is that we have denied ourselves
exploitation of the best industry experience and skills for design and
engineering of this system, and have instead selected a lesser contractor,
for reasons not apparent.
2. To improve these and other current deficiencies, and to proceed
with the project, it is suggested that consideration be given to these
procedures:
a. Produce a sanitized "SECRET" IIS Functional
Requirement Specification document, from the three
studies.
b. Solicit proposals, (using a. above and bidder's briefings),
from 6 to 12 of the major information processing system and
photo interpretation companies such as:
c. Each of these companies would eagerly spend - 5 A
to- of company money and produce 200 to 500 page
technical and cost proposals covering total system development.
d. These proposals could be either for "Systems Engineering
and Technical Direction" contracts only, with "hardware exclusions",
or they could be for the entire system, design, hardware, software,
et al.
e. From this we would receive 6 to 12 competitive proposals
for our technical and cost evaluation. This would give us the
opportunity to compare different and similar approaches, skills
and competencies; and to select the best qualified approach and
contractor. In many cases a systems company would team with
a photo interpretations company to propose combined skills and
experience. These proposals would provide much of the design
work to be covered in the _ Phase II effort, at no cost to
the Government.
f. Award either a "Systems Engineering and Technical
Direction" contract with hardware exclusion, or a total, but
phased, system contract to the best contractor or team.
25X1A
25X1A
-7-
Approved For Release 2002/01/29 : CIA-RDP78BO4747AO01900040036-9
SECR . T
 Approved For Release 2002/01/29 : CIA-RDP78B04747A001900040036-9
._ Phase I would be Detailed System Design and
Implementation Plan.
.. Phase II would be System Engineering, Hardware
and Software Procurement.
Phase III would be System Installation and Test.
These approximately correspond to Phase II, III and IV of
25X1 A the =study.
25X1A g. =would have the opportunity to compete with other bidders,
f h n been an "insider").
4. Objections of "Security" can be raised to this approach, but these
can be resolved. We are currently doing sensitive classified business with
most of the contractors under consideration.
but we will be introu eu
I it is much less trouble for the Agency, and produces a much better system.
(with the advantage o avi g
h. The benefit to the Agency would be in the opportunity
to compare approaches, capabilities, experience and skills.
The application of the skills, experience, and engineering
thought of these companies to the IIS project, through the
proposal route alone would be of great benefit to the final
design and development of the US, at no cost to the Agency.
3. This route requires greater, initial effort on the part of the Agency,
than the apparent current method of climbing in bed with one selected
contractor per project. It forces us to think through what we are doing,
bl ntil we do think this through. In the long run,
AL RN-TIVES
1,. Approve the request for a Phase II contract with for
This is just a down
25X1A
25X1A
cross our fi`,iers and hope we get lucky.
)ayment on ten years of trouble. The past use of this approach is
;robably the reason some of our current ADP efforts are in difficulty.
:i aith, hope, and luck do not solve system problems.
25X1A
25X1 A
2. Return the _ Phab:. II proposal to _ poi~~ting out deficienci2s551A
.
and request a ll mo a horo gh J---mpetence for this
cilitie
c has anything like t
of
console or hundreds u
o
a
a
built a computer, or
r
25X1A
eve
of job. Has
Approved For Release 2002/01/29 : c -RDP78B04747A001900040036-9
S EGRET
 Approved For Release 2002/01/29 CIA-RDP78BO4747AO01900040036-9
00 consoles, displays and
3
Have they ever interfaced they ever written a
digital devices? ulti-processor? Have have 5000 ADP J
other I/O devices with a ~ rain package? Does 10 for
rammers and technicians to call
half upon ram
million instruction p g me Phases 111 and IV?
'neers, prog for
scientists, engl , persons needed full t ring, test and program.
the approximately 100
-have the physical facilities as for i ever handled an ADP
intelli-
Does a project? ever built
de-bugging for this large Has - case
nitude and comp stem? In every
project of this rnag the answer
:Ettion sy
a hoto interpret Quid be affirmative for an
p
c
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
but it, e
?
gence system or
is believed to be negative for IN ~ such as
MMNMMM~
experienced and qualified compaiT
companies
the eirrincnt ADP and PI systems approach a
from the only way to ai
3. Invite proposals This is really th most complex
for competitive evaluation. worth of the
Tex system like IIS stem ever developed).
comp nd P1 system
once a
and advanced single intellig table,
ro ect. This alternative is not accep
4? Abandon the IIS P J owing more urgent.
because the need is real and growing
The
on t'r~e IIS ? uate
ency has not done its homework nrossly inadeq
Clearly, the Ag l . of gaps errors, omissions and are a y commitment.
=8 studies are full Icy
without
development plan and the basis fhcor further Age
25X1A
as a system cominitrnent would be unwise
To proceed with Phase II
better planning and a better defi.nit can of wi-lat and how,
rces
u.
and wasteful of reso
stem, and the several
need for an US type sy However,
mportant.
The urgency of the an NPICoperational system, are ispeed (and
nsive
needed to develop lexity, the greatest rehe
nd comp
25X1A
with a system of this size and only the most deliberate a
dollar
year s
'ectiveness) can be achieved only by 25X1A
Tanning, prior to initiating critic