SECURITY EQUIPMENT BRANCH FUNCTIONS AND ACTIVITIES

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP83B00823R000700020024-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 16
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: March 8, 2000
• Sequence Number: 24
• Content Type: OUTLINE

Approved For Release 2000/0 / p: i dQ%k23R000 0024
SECURITY EQUIPMENT BRANCH
Provide an intrusion alarm program for
foreign installations.
ACTIVITY
A. Test and evaluate alarm equipment to ensure
that the Agency has state-of-the-art security alarm
systems.
B. Develop through ORD and OTS both improved
and Agency peculiar equipments.
C. Install and maintain intrusion alarm equip-
ment worldwide.
Develop hardware specifications and policy regarding
safekeeping equipments including safes, locks, vault doors,
vaults and secure areas.
A. Test and evaluate safekeeping equipment.
B. Participate in government sponsored tests
of security construction.
25X1A C. Develo s ecial security devices such as
detectors.
D. Develop techniques for ins ectin h sical
security equipment for evidence . 25X1A
Approved For Release 2000/0@01i T4hk23R000700020024-3
 Approved-For Release 2000/ 9 O~n, I DP O0823R000700020024-3 F 1) EN T1 Al
25X1A
B. ecurity equipment to prevent
WE11W
III. FUNCTION
Develop hardware and Agency policy regarding classified
material destruction devices.
A. Test and evaluate commercially available
destruction equipment.
B. Through the manufacturer, modify equipment
to Agency needs.
C. Participate in government sponsored develop-
ment programs.
IV. FUNCTION
Maintain continuing liaison with security personnel
of other government agencies as well as representatives
of commercial-?~jr engaged in the production of security
equipment.
A. Act as the Agency's representative to the
Interagency Advisory Committee on Security Equipment
which is primarily engaged in the development of
specifications for physical security equipment.
B. Periodically visit the manufacturing
facilities of the major producers of security
equipment to consult on new developments.
Approved For Release 2000/09/02 : CIA-RDP83 023R000700020024-3
 IDENT Il 0"kO1FoOReW9W201 M : Q"@@8 C@9a9K790Q Anent responsible
for testing and evaluating alarm equipment
to ensure that the Agency has state-of-the-art
security alarm systems.
ACTIVITY CODE: III, B, (c) 1 COMPONENT: OS/PTOS/Technical Security
Is (are) the reference(s) still in force? Yes V No
Who is (are) the beneficiarv(ies) of this activity?
,4? C-,E l C r~ . 9.~/dJT'c Qv f25? ~9~ 25X1A
Do you feel the activity is still necessary? Yes 1/ No /
Do(es) the beneficiary(ies) feel it is still necessary? Yes 'V No
Can the activity be done more efficiently or less costly? Yes No
If so, how?
Do you feel that responsibility for the activity should be trap .ferred
to another OS component or to another Office? Yes No V
If so, where and why?
Can another component do the act" ity more efficiently? Less costly?
More properly? Yes No If so, which component and why?
Does-the activity include an ing questionable in the light of
Watergate? Yes No vIf so, what?
Can this activity be reduced in scope/size or discontinued witho
significant effect on overall Agency security? Yes No
If so, how?
Is there any activity not now being pursue y OS that you feel is more
important than this one?.--Yes No If so, what? -
Divi-sion/SEB
DATE:
Approved For Release 2000/09/02 : CIA-RDP83B00823R000700020024-3
 IDENT IAAOVVdcoRooRelA IaAp'Q1Y09/02rlQA 13i3Og?2 ~ygq} ,20@ onent responsible
for developing improved and Agency peculiar
25X1A alarm equipment.
ACTIVITY CODE: III B, (c) 2 COMPONENT: OS/PTOS/Technical Security.
DivisionTSEB
EVALUATION: DATE:
What is (are) our referenc (s) for this activity? Date(s)?
25X1A ,:) & "'2e-t /9?
/
Is (are) the reference(s) still in force? Yes No
Who is (are) the beneficiary(ies)of this activity?
,~,1~ 1Jcy L.~~~.rCt~ ~/~2~ 95~ 25X1A
Do you feel the activity is still necessary? Yes No
Do(es) the beneficiary(ies) feel it is still necessary? Yes
No
:LZ -
Can the activity be done more efficiently or less costly? Yes No
If so, how?
Do you feel that responsibility for the activity should betran/ferred
to another OS component or to another Office? Yes No
If so, where and why?
Can another component do the ac` vity more.efficiently? Less costly?
More properly? Yes No If so, which component and why?
Does the activity include an thing questionable in the light of
Watergate? Yes No If so, what?
Can this activity be reduced in scope/size or discontinued without
significant effect on overall Agency security? Yes No
If so, how?
Is there any activity not now being pursue by OS that you feel is more
important than this one?.-Yes No If so, what?
Approved For Release 2000/09/02 : CIA-RDP83B00823R000700020024-3
 IDENTINW4VelcoF,or l lAOPQM9/02I:IPA > 08#23 WTQ( OQ4~onent responsible
for installing and maintaining intrusion
alarm equipment worldwide.
ACTIVITY CODE: III, B c) 3 COMPONENT: OS/PTOS/Technical Security
EVALUATION:
What is
Division
DATE:
ctivity? Date(s)?
25X1A
Is (are) Yes / No
Who is (are) the beneficiary(ies) of this activity?
~ir~%vC ,gLG~/7a ,TS ~v ~Srsr~~
Do you feel the activity is still necessary? Yes No
25X1A
Do(es) the beneficiary(ies) feel it is still necessary? Yes V No
Can the activity be done more efficiently or less costly? Yes No
If so, how?
Do you feel that responsibility for the activity should he trar/ferred
to another OS component or to another Office? Yes No
If so, where and why?
Can another component do the act' ity more, efficiently? Less costly?
More properly? Yes No if so, which component and why?
Does the activity include any, hing questionable in the light of
Watergate? Yes No If so, what?
Can this activity be reduced in scope/size or discontinued witho,
significant effect on overall Agency security? Yes No
If so, how?
Is there any activity not now. being pursue
by OS that you feel is more
important than, this one? -Yes No If so, what? -
/
Approved For Release 2000/09/02 : CIA-RDP83B00823R000700020024-3
 IDENT IAooovdcmpoolReiAmizop'Q1Y0g/02T.1 A &3300$2 7-q( 0@24itoonent responsible
for testing and evaluating safekeeping
equipment.
ACTIVITY CODE: III B (c) 4 COMPONENT: OS/PTOS/Technical Security
Division
EVALUATION: DATE:
What is (are) our reference(s) for this activity? Date(s)?
Is (are) the reference(s) still in force?
Who is (are) the beneficiary(ies) of this
Do(es) the beneficiary(ies) feel it is still necessary? Yes No
Can the activity be done more efficiently or less costly? Yes INN
r . -
Do you feel the activity is still necessary? Yes V Mn
-Do you feel that responsibility for the activity should be transferred
to another OS component or to another Office? Yes No
If so, where and why?
Can another component do the activity more.efficiently? Less costly?
More properly? Yes No If so, which component and why?
Does the activity include a thing questionable in the light of
Watergate? Yes No If so, what? V
Can this activity be reduced in scope/size or discontinued witho
significant effect on overall Agency security? Yes No
If so, how?
important than this one?.--.Yes No i If so, what?
Is there any activity not now being pursued ).iy OS that you feel is more
Approved For Release 2000/09/02 : CIA-RDP83B00823R000700020024-3
 IDE`;TIAOFWIQ'VOCRogf elPLI$p"ffl9/02rhgAeFMW 2 QW9gFoc0af} onent responsible
for participating-in government sponsored
tests of security construction.
ACTIVITY CODE: III B (c) 5 COMPONENT: OS/PTOS/Technical Security
EVALUATION:
Division/ EB
DATE:
Is (are) the reference(s) still in force? Yes +/ No
Who is (are) the beneficiary(ies) of this activity?
, c W 0c71450147N7T p d leShgJ
Do you feel the activity is still necessary? Yes No
1C':;1 SL 1J SLill IleCessary: Tes V NO
Can the activity be done more efficiently or less costly? Yes No~
If so, how?
Do you feel that responsibility for the activity should be tranVferred
to another OS component or to another Office? Yes No
If so, where and why?
Can another component do the act' ity more. efficiently? Less costly?
More properly? Yes No If so, which component and why?
Does the activity include anything questionable in the light of
Watergate? Yes No i If so, what?
Can this activity be reduced in scope/size or discontinued witho,
significant effect on overall Agency security? Yes No
If so, how?
Is there any activity not now being pursuecj/by OS that you feel is more
important than this one.? _Yes No j If so, what?
Approved For Release 2000/09/02 : CIA-RDP83B00823R000700020024-3
 r 09/027;hp@?jc3B00eJ2 8000700020024-3
I DENT I p OropRelR o ecurity component responsible
i
for developing special:security devices..
ACTIVITY CODE: III B, (c) 6 COMPONENT: OS/PTOS/Technical Security
Division
EVALUATION: DATE:
activity? Date(s)?
Is (are) the reference(s) still in force? Yes No
Who is (are) the beneficiary(ies) of this activity?
A ,v ;-,v 7:5 ov~~s~4 c, 25X1A
Do you feel the activity is still necessary? Yes No
Do(es) the beneficiary(ies) feel it is still necessary? Yes f/ No /
Can the activity be done more efficiently or less costly? Yes N
If so, how?
Do you feel that responsibility for the activity should be tray,
to another OS component or to another Office? Yes No
If so, where and why?
Can another component do the act' ity more, efficiently? Less costly?
More properly? Yes No If so, which component and why?
Does the activity include anything questionable in the light of
Watergate? Yes No tV If so, what?
Can this activity be reduced in scope/size or discontinued witho
significant effect on overall Agency security? Yes No
If so, how?
Is there any activity not now being pursued by OS that you feel is more
important than this one? _.Yes No pursued
so, what?
Approved For Release 2000/09/02 : CIA-RDP83B00823R000700020024-3
 Approved For Release 2000/09/0,
IDENTIFICATION OF ACTIVITY:
ACTIVITY CODE: III, B (c) I COMPONENT: OS/PTOS/Technical Security
Division
EVALUATION: DATE:
25X1A
Is (are) the reference(s) still in force? Yes No
Who is (are) the beneiciary(ies) of this activity?
A c v , ~i/ts2S~s~Is
25X1 A
Do you feel the activity is still necessary? Yes / No
Do(es) the beneficiary(ies) feel it is still necessary? Yes _/ No
Can the activity be done more efficiently or less costly? Yes No
L
__
If
so
o
?
Do you feel that responsibility for the activity should be tran,/ferred
to another OS component or to another Office? Yes No
If so, where and why?
Can another component do the act* ity more.efficiently? Less costly?
More properly? Yes No If so- which com
onent and ,. h
?
p
y
Does the activity include an/t hing questionable in the light of
Watergate? Yes No V If so, what?
Can this activity be reduced in scope/size or discontinued with
significant effect on overall Agency security? Yes No
If so, how?
Is there any activity not now being pursue/by OS that you feel is more
important than..-this one_?.. _.Yes No _t//. If so,-what?
Approved For Release 2000/09/02 : CIA-RDP83B00823R000700020024-3
 25X1A
I DENT IA0A0*Ko0Fe~1A$+g009/
ACTIVITY CODE: III, B, (c) 8 COMPONENT: OS/PTOS/Technical Security
EVALUATION:
What is
Is (are) the reference(s) still in force?
Who is (are) the beneficiary(ies) of this
activity?
Do you feel the activity is still necessary?
Do(es) the beneficiary(ies) feel it is still
Can the activity be done more efficiently or
If so, how?
DATE:
OU~' S64~ 25X1A
Yes V No
necessary? Yes No
less costly? Yes No
Do you feel that responsibility for the activity should be trar_.ferred
to another OS component or to another Office? Yes No V
If so, where and why?
Can another component do the activity more efficiently? Less costly?
More properly? Yes No If so, which component and why?
Does the activity include arthing questionable in the light of
Watergate? Yes No V If so, what?
Can this activity be reduced in scope/size or discontinued witho
significant effect on overall Agency security? Yes Noj
If so, how?
Is there any activity not now being pursue by OS that you feel is more
important than. this one? . . Yes No.= -If so, what?
Approved For Release 2000/09/02 : CIA-RDP83B00823R000700020024-3
 IDENT I=, To"'F?FRAgifieVMbl6n9/O:ThCIPVFPP@;Bg2?RQ 7PP~2-DcM3onent responsible
for testing and evaluating commercially
available classified material destruction
equipment.
ACTIVITY CODE: III B, (c) 9 COMPONENT: OS/PTOS/Technical Security
Division
DATE:
vity? Date(s)?
Who is (are) the beneficiary(ies) o fhs activity?
~~~~ey ~Gis~~~Pl7S O~/G s ,4c )
Do you feel the activity is still necessary? Yes No
Do(es) the beneficiary(ies) feel it is still necessary? Yes 'V No
Can the activity be done more efficiently or less costly? Yes Xo~
If so, how?
Is (are) the reference (s) still in e? Yes No
Do you feel that responsibility for the activity should be tra sferred
to another OS component or to another Office? Yes No
If so, where and why? .
Can another component do the ac-Li ity more.efficiently? Less costly?
More properly? Yes No If so, which component and why?
Does the activity include any king questionable in the light of
Watergate? Yes No j If so, what?
Can this activity be reduced in scope/size or discontinued with" At
significant effect on overall Agency security? Yes No V
If so, how?
Is there any activity not now being pursued/by OS that you feel is more
important than this one? Yes No If so, what?
Approved For Release 2000/09/02 : CIA-RDP83B00823R000700020024-3
 IDE ,'TIb4'Pi5Ad&M o@P,epMV4$gW09/OZhgl*p,pp@~Bgo2,?KAQg7 2Q nent responsible
for working with-the manufacturer to have
commercially produced classified material
destruction equipment modified to meet
Agency needs.
Division
EVALUATION: DATE:
ACTIVITY CODE: III B, (c) 10 COMPONENT: OS/P.TOS/Technical Security
25X1A
What is (are) our referen
Who is (are) the beneficiary(ies) of this activity?
ity? Date(s)?
Is (are) the reference(s) still in force? Yes V' No
Do you feel the activity is still necessary? Yes No
Do(es) the beneficiary(ies) feel it is still necessary? Yes - No
Can the activity be done more efficiently or less costly? Yes No
If so, how?
If so, where and why?
Do you feel that responsibility for the activity should be trapf f erred
to another OS component or to another Office? Yes No V
Can another component do the activity more,efficiently? Less costly?
More properly? Yes No If so, which component and why?
Does the activity include anyfthing questionable in the light of
Watergate? Yes No // If so, what?
Can this activity be reduced in scope/size or discontinued witho
significant effect on overall Agency security? Yes No
If so, how?
Is there any activity not now being pursue by OS that you feel is more
important than, this one.?..-Yes No If so, what?
Approved For Release 2000/09/02 : CIA-RDP83B00823R000700020024-3
 IDENT I A_PPtM_b61To0ReWgWVQ0pM/02
fhglAOF?E?TBW?2ARNW9QFCLOSA onent responsible
for participating-in gQvernme,t sponsored
programs for the development of classified
material destruction devices.
ACTIVITY CODE: III, B, (c) 11 COMPONENT: OS/PTOS/Technical Security
EVALUATION:
vity? Date(s)?
Is (are) the reference(s) still in force? Yes
Who is (are) the beneficiary(ies)of this activit
ZAQrswe
Do you feel the activity is still necessary?
Do(es) the beneficiary(ies) feel it is still
Can the activity be done more efficiently or
If so, how?
to another OS component or to another Office? Yes No
DATE:
Division
25X1A
Yes V No
necessary? Yes No
less costly? Yes No
Do you feel that responsibility for the activity should be trap ferred
Can another component do the act' ity more.efficiently? Less costly?
More properly? Yes No If so, which component and why?
Does the activity include any hing questionable in the light of
Watergate? Yes No If so, what?
significant effect on overall Agency security? Yes No7
T-P
Can this activity be reduced in scope/size or discontinued witho
Is there any activity not now being pursed by OS'that you feel is more
important than this one? _.Yes No If so,-what? -
Approved For Release 2000/09/02 : CIA-RDP83B00823R000700020024-3
 IDENT IAi~eb/iOlFoOReI6"eT2'0109/0 ZhgUA}L:ZDp63B@Q829M(~W2@ Pl)nent responsible
for acting as the-Agency!s representative
to the Interagency Advisory Committee on
Security Equipment which is primarily engaged
in the development of specifications for
physical security equipment. -
ACTIVITY CODE: III, B. (c) 12
EVALUATION:
COMPONENT: OS/PTOS/Technical Security
ivislon
DATE:
What is
Who is (are) the beneficiary(ies) of this activity?
ivity? Date(s)?
Is (are) the reference(s) still in force? Yes No
Do(es) the beneficiary(ies) feel it is still necessary? Yes 'V No
Can the activity be done more efficiently or less costly? Yes No
Do you feel the activity is still necessary? Yes j/ No
Do you feel that responsibility for the activity should be trap ferred
to another OS component or to another Office? Yes No
If so, where and why?
Can another component do the ac` vity more.efficiently? Less costly?
More properly? Yes .No ' If so, which component and why?
Does the activity include any/Ehing questionable in the light of
Watergate? Yes No V If so, what?
significant effect on overall Agency security? Yes No
If so, how?
Can this activity be reduced in scope/size or discontinued withot
Is there any activity not now being pursV by OS that you feel is more
important than. this one.? _. Yes No If so, what? -
Approved For Release 2000/09/02 : CIA-RDP83B00823R000700020024-3
 IDENT IA kkiTkOiFo0Rel6ffe[2'MDYOS/02'hC1PDKIBP8bB0a2SR00 7D,092Q0 }1Dnent responsible
for visting manufacturing facilities of the
major producers of security equipment to
consult on new development.
ACTIVITY CODE: III, B, (c) 13 C(NIPONENT: OS/PTOS/Technical Security
Division '1B
EVALUATION:
25X1A
What is (are) our reference(s) for this activity? Date(s)?
25X1A
Who is (are) the beneficiary(ies) of this activity?
Is (are) the reference(s) still in force? Yes V No
Do(es) the beneficiary(ies) feel it is still necessary? Yes V No
Can the activity be done more efficiently or less costly? Yes N
if so, how?
Do you feel the activity is still necessary? Yes V No
to another OS component or to another Office? Yes No
If so, where and why?
Do you feel that responsibility for the activity should be traferred
Can another component do the act' ity more.efficiently? Less costly?
More properly? Yes No If so, which component and why?
Does the activity include thing questionable in the light of
Watergate? Yes_ No V/ If so, what?
significant effect on overall Agency security? Yes No
If so, how?
Can this activity be reduced in scope/size or discontinued wit
important than. this one?.-Yes No . \If so, what?
Is there any activity not now being pursuec)/by OS that you feel is more
Approved For Release 2000/09/02 : CIA-RDP83B00823R000700020024-3
 F-1 UNCLASSIFIED
^ SECRET
ROUTING AND RECORD SHEET
SUBJECT: (Optional) 25X1A
FROM:
EXTENSION
NO.
DATE
Policy and Plans Group
x5311
10 March 1975
TO: (Officer designation, room number, and
ildi
)
b
DATE
OFFICER'S
COMMENTS (Number each comment to show from whom
t
h
ng
u
INITIALS
.)
commen
to whom. Draw a line across column after eac
RECEIVED
FORWARDED
Chief, Security Equipm
ent
Under Objective BS7104 the
Branch
Office of Security will re-
2
view and validate all Office
C5?~
Iv I
of Security functions,
activities... to ensure effec-
3.
tiveness, economy and efficie
The attached documents re-
present two milestones under
4.
that objective. Milestone 1,
the components identified
their functions and activitie
5.
Milestone 2 was establishment
of a format for evaluating
these... activities. It is re-
6.
quested that Security Equip-
ment Branch review the attach
ments and:
a) Certify that there are no
deletions/corrections/
additions to be made to th
8.
previous listing submitted
by your office.
b) Review the Identification
9.
of Activity statement on
each evaluation sheet to
10
ensure it fully equals to
.
the comparable activity
from your offices listing.
11.
c) Use the attached format
to evaluate each individua
activity.
12.
13.
14.
15.
%~IM-UXL
JV 00
WAF
FORM /~~ O USE EDIITIO S ^ SECRET ^ CONFIDENTIAL ^
3-62 V USE 0 NLY
For R~aj% f j09/02 : CIA-RDP83B0p8uu3 f6f J??At-3
USE ONLY
^ UNCLASSIFIED