INSPECTOR GENERAL'S REPORT ON FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85G00105R000100130018-1
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 30, 1998
• Sequence Number: 18
• Publication Date: March 17, 1967
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Release 2002/06/18 : CIA-RDP85G00105R000100130018-1
17 March 1967
MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director for Intelligence
SUBJECT . Inspector General's Report on Foreign Intelligence
Collection Requirements
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 4 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
Approved For 105R000100130018-1
 Approved For Release 2002/06/18 : CIA-RDP85G00105R000100130018-1
A ~ ONLY
suggests that you "furnish all necessary support" to CGS as it goes
about righting the accumulated, wrongs of two d.ecad.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 de-
scribed. in the survey.
7. I dontt 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 d.o--and. the combined. restate-
ment does this--is to spell out explicitely the CGS Chief's authority
to go to office directors or to you and Carl Duckett with his recom-
mendations for corrective action where he feels that is necessary.
9. The other 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
A Yap %%L . ULT. Wh
Approved For Release 2002/06/18 : CIA-RDP85GO0105R000100130018-1
 Approved For Release 2002/06/18 : CIA-RDP85G00105R000100130018-1
1. " 6UY
L 20r
L
61P ..., ~ ~
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, 1)+, 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. 4. 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.
Attachments:
1. Comments of the Intelligence Directorate on certain
recommendations in the IG Survey
2. Memorandum for Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
Approved For 94Y00105R000100130018-1