MARK CLARK COMMITTEE MEMBERS' VISIT TO ORR, 23 NOVEMBER 1954

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP88-00374R000100260049-9
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 4, 2000
• Sequence Number: 49
• Publication Date: November 23, 1954
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Release 2001/09/04: CIA-RDP88-00374R000100260049-9
Next 3 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2001/09/04: CIA-RDP88-00374R000100260049-9
 Approved For Releases r CIA-RDP88-00374ROOO'' 0Q.*00
23 November 19511
uMORA DUN FOR: Assistant Director for Operations
,'ULJ2CT: Mark Clark Committee Members' Visit to
ORR, 23 November 19511
. Colonel Miller and Mr. McGruder met with Mr. Morell
and at 0900 in DJE offices.
2. Colonel Miller largely confined his questions to the
"What do you do and how do you do it?" approach. During the
presentation of the background and development of D/E func-
tions, he inquired as to the sources of information necessary
to effect controls on strategic items w id precisely how this
information was used. At one point he needed a detailed
explanation to convince him that there was no unnecessary
duplication between the D/E staff and the Diversion Control
Net function.
3. Both Colonel Miller and Mr. McGruder asked their
usual questions concerning authority or terms of reference
for vasdous activities and coordinating functions. They are
also interested in exactly which components have intelligence
production functions and rich are pure coordinating.
4. The visit was concluded by a brief tour through the
E/ST files.
5. From 10:15 to 11:10 a.m., Colonel Y0.1 er and Mr.
McGruder were briefed by and the D/T staff. Here
again there were no budge, tary or' administrative questions
asked. The following questions were asked and appear to be
indicative of a substantive interest in operations:
a. What is the nature of Division's authority: Is
it adequate or should a more formal directive be forth-
co-ang?
This document has been
approved for release through
the HISTORICAL 'VIE'W PROGRAM of
the Central Intalligence Agency.
2
Date________
pppfoved For Release 2001/09/04: CIA-RDP88-00374R000100260049-9
/C)l7D
 Approved For Releise)2001
IA-RDP88-00374R000 100260049-9
b. How many people are trained to do field
collections? Is this number adequate?
co v That are the necessary qualifications for D/T
analysts? (Special cuestion was asked on language
competence.)
d. To what extent do field operations receive
Service support?
a Bow are analysis priorities determined:
b ~
h. What overseas competence does the Division have
and do these personnel do anything except collect?
i. 1,4hat is the organization of the Division?
6. They were conducted on a very brief tour of the Office
and both seemed impressed with techniques employed. Colonel
Miller subsequently remarked on the enthusiasm of the analysts.
7. Attached is a statement by the Chief, Basic Division,
on the visit of Colonel Miller and Mr. McGruder to that office.
It should also be mentioned that Colonel Miller brought up the
matter of Career Service rotation of personnel and how it
might affect off icesz-wherein a continu'ty of service was
desirable.
Enclosure:
Statement of D/3/RR
Execu ive, _ '
Approved For Release 2001/09/04: CIA-RDP88-00374R000100260049-9
 Approved For Release 2001/09/0 ` A R P88-00374R000100260049-9
RESUME OF CONVERSATIONS HELD WITH THE
STAFF MEMBERS OF THE CLARK COMMITTEE
Tuesday, 23 November 19514
Present were: Colonel Miller, Mr. NaGrvder,
1. The staff members arrived at approximately 11:30 A.M., having
been delayed in examination of other ORR components. Upon arrival
Colonel Miller indicated that he had to report to the Task Force of the
Clark Committee and would be unable to be present for several hours.
He returned at approximately 3 P.M. and remained for fifty minutes for
a brief question period at the end of the disoussion.
2. I inquired of Mr. McGruder whether or not he had read the
report on the NIS Program which had been-prepared for the Clark Committee
and he informed as that he had not. I therefore took the next hour to
brief his on the background and development of the NIS Program. We
adjourned for lunch at 12:30 and at 1:30 continued discussions. The
questions raised by the staff members, specifically Mr. McGruder, gave
no definite pattern as to the oboective of the Clark Committee or of the
staff members themselves. They generally indicated lack of familiarity
of much intelligence operations, as well as the mission, purpose and
development of the NIS Program itself. In consequence, much of the
discussion was that of clarification of these points. Many times our
discussion digressed to minutia. Several, times I attempted to bring
it back to fundamental points and to give: them as well rounded a view
as could be made available.
3. After general discussions we went to the different branches in the
Division, discussing the problems with the Branch Chiefs. The last fifty
minutes were devoted to. bringing Colonel Miller. up to date on our discussions
and replying to certain questions which he raised.
4. The general flavor of Colonel Miller's questions were, it appeared,
in terms of getting other nations to do parts of this job. First the
British,.and then specifically he mentioned France and Italy.as areas which
might reasonably be expected to do NIS for..us..on those countries in return
for the large funds made available to them from this country. After I had
pointed out the co aunist infiltration in both Italy and France, and the
highly questionable results of any such intelligence produced in those
countries, he inquired about the South.4meriean countries doing the job
for us in those areas. His questions indicated in my mind a lack of awareness
of what the NIS was in its whole intent and a rather naive viewpoint as to
the end product being the alpha and omega of the whole intelligence process
as though in fact we could rely on any such intelligence product in a foreign
country to satisfy our own requirements.
Approved For Release 2001/09/04: CIA-RDP88-00374R000100260049-9
 Approved For Release 2001/0 L L- DP88-00374R000100260049-9
5. Sunsna . I was generally disappointed in the previous briefing
of the srs in terms of the NIS picture not only in their failure
to read what had been produced for their enlightenment, which would have
saved much.time and avoided a large part of our discussions, but also in
terms of the level of interest which they showed respecting aspects of
intelligence as well as the NIS Program. Iteir.questions appeared to be
without pattern and without any full awareness of the important aspects
of the intelligence process. I cannot gauge the amount of information
which they received from my briefing or from those of my Branch Chiefs.
As a general conclusion I would say they were as much confused as enlightened
because of their lack of background before doming down here. I might add
that there were no questions respecting budgetary support of other agencies
in the program or any questions on personnel or budgetary aspects. Colonel
Miller indicated on leaving that he might well return after he had found
out what they wanted to know. In conclusion, I think they saw only the
underbrush-and neither the trees nor the woods.
'isCCSSx~:
Approved For Release 2001/09/04: CIA-RDP88-00374R000100260049-9