INSPECTOR GENERAL'S REPORT ON FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80B01495R000400070006-8
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 27, 2005
• Sequence Number: 6
• Publication Date: March 17, 1967
• Content Type: MF

Appr, ved lease, 2005106107 __CIA:BE p80 11495 R000400070006-8
A clU~ A do'
OL13X r,^" --:;fin ~Oil3%
ii
17 March 1967
MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director for Intelligence
SUBJECT . Inspector General's Report on Foreign Intelligence
Collection Require3hents
1. There are two attachments to this memorandum. One contains
the comments of the Directorate on the 20 recommendations (of a total
of 27 in the survey) addressed to you. I believe no general comment
is needed, beyond that given in the proposed memorandum of transmittal
to Admiral Taylor (also attached,) and in Ed's interim report to the
Admiral on i. March.
2. Comments were prepared initially by the members of the
DDI review team working separately on assigned recommendations.
Following that, a joint meeting of the team was held and, the version
that came out that session was sent to all office directors and staff
chiefs for review. The comments that I propose you forward to Admiral
Taylor reflect most of the suggestions resulting from that review.
There are no reservations or substantive exceptions on the part of
any office to the restatements and comments in the attachment.
3. The first two pages of the attachment summarize the comments
and indicate the nature of the restatements, recommendation by recom-
mendation.
4. Twelve of the 20 recommendations concern organizational re-
lationships and responsibilities in the collection requirements field.
The basic problems are three--to relate the responsibilities of the
Collection Guidance Staff to the intelligence producing offices of
DDS&T; to define the authority of the Chief, Collection Guidance Staff;
and. to find practical ways to enable line officials--office directors
and division chiefs--in DDI and DDS&T to meet their responsibilities
in the collection guidance process. By combination and restatement,
we have reduced the twelve recommendations to eight. Foremost among
these are Recommendations Nos. 8 and 26.
5. Recommendation No. 8 in its original form simply calls for you,
together with Carl Duckett, to issue a mission-and-functions statement
for CGS in the same terms for each Directorate. Recommendation No. 26
AdG
Ot13X -
Approved For - 95R000400070006-8
 Apprcced For Release 2005/06/07 : CIA RDP80BQJ49 5R000400070006-8
AdO tt AdO:,~
LOii3K --r-r 10~3~
suggests that you "furnish all necessary support" to CGS as it goes
about righting the accumulated. wrongs of two decad.es. The team
believed that these two recommendations should be put together and
that the naked hopes should, be clothed with the means to do some-
thing.
6. You will note that our approach throughout is based. on the
assumption that DDS&T will agree to have its offices enter into a
normal, cooperative, and constructive relationship on collection
guidance matters with CGS. This is so fundamental to so many of the
recommendations that, if DDS&T were not to cooperate, I doubt the
feasibility of the Agency progressing much beyond. the situation d.e-
scribed in the survey.
7. I don't know what DDS&T's position on the survey is. There
may be some feeling that DDS&T ought to establish its own collection
guidance staff. If so, I think this would be a mistake. We propose
instead, in the combined Recommendation No. 8 and. 26, to establish a
Collection Guidance Advisory Group to advise Mr. Hitchcock. Its
members would be the Deputy Directors (or their representatives) of
FMSAC, OBI, OCI, ONE, ORR, and OSI, with Chief, CGS, in the chair.
With such a group in operation, the producing offices of both DDI
and DDS&T could. have a direct and continuing voice in CGS activities
as it set about "mitigating deleterious effects" and. "applying strict
selective criteria." CGS in turn would have a regular forum for
bringing to the attention of management at an effective level the
problems or difficulties it was encountering.
8. CGS clearly cannot be given a charter that would. allow it
to substitute its judgment for that of line officials on a no-questions-
asked basis. Even if you were willing to entertain that approach in
the DDI, it would kill any prospect of DDS&T cooperation in the col-
lection guidance process. What we can do--and the combined. restate-
ment does this--is to spell out explicitely the CGS Chief's authority
to go to office d.irectors or to you and Carl Duckett with his recom-
mendations for corrective action where he feels that is necessary.
9. The otter major recommendations in this category are Nos. 24+
and. 25. As originally set forth, they require you and. Carl Duckett
to instruct the chiefs of substantive divisions and the directors of
substantive offices to "assume" a detailed list of responsibilities.
In restating these two recommendations as one, we d.o not attempt to
argue the desirability of all the "responsibilities" the survey group
would. impose on these managers. Instead., the restatement shifts the
focus for action to Chief, CG.S, and the Advisory Group, and charges
them with "devising and implementing practical measures to assist the
Approved For elease 2005/06/07 : CIA-RDP80B 1495R000400070006-8
 Appr ved For R' (ease 2005/06/07 : CAA-RQp80S01495R000400070006=&-
Ad00~ 'Ad0'
Od3X - ~ "'Oi/3X
directors of the substantive offices and their division chiefs in
carrying out their responsibilities..." The listings of the original
recommendations can serve as guidelines to a methodical attack on the
problems of management raised by the survey.
10. In restating most of the other recommendations--Nos. 6, 7,
10/11/12 (combined. as one), 13, 14, and 27--that fall in this category,
we have incorporated, the concept of collaborative action between Chief,
CGS, and the Advisory Group.
11. Of the survey's seven recommendations not originally for DDI
action, three are for the DDP, two for the DDS&T, and, two for the CIA
SIGINT Officer. The DDI will be affected by the action taken on some
of these. For example, the DDP must undertake considerable work in
connection with No. 3--concerning DCID 5/5 and the Interagency Proprity
Committee--before we can do much about No. Li. So far, however, we have
had no formal contact with either DDP or DDS&T representatives and. do
not know what comments they have made on the survey or on individual
recommendations.
12. The team members and I will be happy to meet with you at your
convenience on the survey and the comments we propose you send, to Admiral
Taylor.
ruce U. ,
Special Assistant to the I
for special Projects
Attachments:
1. Comments of the Intelligence Directorate on certain
recommendations in the IG Survey .
2. Memorandum for Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
25X1
Approved For R 495R000400070006-8
 Approved For Release 2005/06/07 : CIA-RDP80BO1495R000400070006-8
Next 17 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2005/06/07 : CIA-RDP80BO1495R000400070006-8