31 MAY 1988 MEETING WITH SENATE STAFF MEMBERS ON NET ASSESSMENTS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90M00005R000900070024-5
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 27, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 22, 2013
• Sequence Number: 24
• Publication Date: June 7, 1988
• Content Type: MEMO

Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP90M00005R000900070024-5
ADMINISTRATIVE - INTERNAL USE ONLY
The Director of Central Intelligence
Washington,D.C.20505
National Intelligence Council
NIC# 02036/88
7 June 1988
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Central Intelligence
VIA: Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
Chairman, National Intelligence Council
FROM:
SUBJECT:'
MG Larry D. Budge, USA
National Intelligence Officer for
General Purpose Forces
31 May 1988 Meeting with Senate Staff Members on Net
Assessments
1. On 31 May I met with Jeffrey Smith, General Counsel to the Senate
Armed Services Committee and Senator Nunn's designee to the Senate Select
Committee on Intelligence (SSCI). He was accompanied by Richard D. Finn,
Professional Staff Member to the Senate Armed Services Committee. I was
accompanied by Captain Thomas T. Holme, Jr., Assistant National Intelligence
Officer for General Purpose Forces. Also present were Robert Buckman,
Office of Congressional Affairs, and Chris Holmes and Paul Rossa, Office of
Soviet Analysis.
2. The staffers asked for the meeting to review the status of
Intelligence Community participation in the net assessment process and to
determine the extent to which Interagency Net Assessments were being
conducted. The Senate Armed Services Committee apparently plans to discuss
net assessment during their review of the Intelligence Authorization Act in
about two weeks. They also suggested that the Committee might provide
further guidance on the subject of net assessment to the Intelligence
Community, DoD, or both. The staffers made it clear that members of the
Senate Armed Services Committee were primarily interested in the net
assessment of specific weapons systems. The Senators want to use results of
these net assessments as a major input into their decisions on DoD requests
to procure the specific weapons systems. Smith acknowledged that this was
expecting a great deal of the net assessment methodology. The Senators were
also interested in strategic net assessments (such as the Chairman's
Military Net Assessment), but this interest was secondary to weapons systems
net assessments.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP90M00005R000900070024-5
Declassified and Approved,fol.R.!le.ase..2913/qi??.,:,,p,_AT ji,IpP,9.9y00005R000900070024-5
3. I reviewed, briefly, the evolution of NIO/GPF's participation in the
net assessment process since last summer and concluded that we were making
good progress, particularly with the Chairman's Military Net Assessment. I
mentioned that we had had some problems with getting data from DIA but that
the situation had improved significantly. I discussed the role of the Red
Advisory Panel, on which the Intelligence Community is represented, and the
procedures we were using to coordinate issues and data within the
Intelligence Community. While not antagonistic in their reaction, the
staffers pointed out that DIA's serving as the "primary action agent" had
the potential to be self-serving. I pointed out that my involvement was
designed to prevent that happening. DIA had the manpower, the expertise,
and the experience; therefore, it was quite logical for me to appoint them
the "primary action agent." I tried to impress upon the staffers that
Intelligence Community involvement in DoD/JCS net assessments was a new
phenomena and some in DoD were still wary of our participation. However, we
are making progress. I suggested that the Senate Armed Services Committee
wait until they see the Chairman's Military Net Assessment before giving us
any further guidance.
4. The staffers then inquired why there were no more net assessments
than the five listed in the plan sent to congress. In fact, four of these
net assessments are subsets of the Chairman's Military net Assessment so
there are really only two net assessments. My answer was that DoD had not
recommended any others. We had raised the issue of weapons systems net
assessments at the time the plan was drafted and DoD said they had no
weapons systems which required net assessments. I provided the staffers a
copy of the recently developed Net Assessment Coordinating Committee (NACC)
Charter which requires the preparation of an annual plan for Interagency Net
Assessments. The Intelligence Community is an equal participant with DoD in
developing this plan; both the DDI and the NIO/GPF sit on the NACC.
However, DoD should be the one to propose most of the net assessments since
it is normally DoD forces, strategy, and weapons system which are being
assessed. I stressed that the staffers really needed to talk with DoD to
discuss the issue of additional net assessments. They promised that they
would. The staffers asked if the Intelligence Community was prepared to do
weapons system net assessments and I assured them that we were, if and when
the requirement was placed on the table. I also discussed the resource
implications to the Intelligence Community of becoming heavily involved in
this sort of net assessment. Analysts who are tied up doing net assessments
are not doing intelligence analysis, which is the primary mission of the
Intelligence Community. Chris Holmes pointed out that it was not only a
question of numbers, but that it was the demand on limited numbers of highly
qualified analysts that created the problem. I have asked Captain Holme to
develop the manpower figures involved in providing Intelligence Community
support to the Chairman's Military net Assessment.
5. We also briefly discussed the status of the Net Technical Assessment
on Low Observables. I informed them that we were coming up to speed and
fully expected that we would be able to do it in accordance with the plan.
The staffers were not particularly interested in this assessment as it deals
primarily with pure technology rather than weapons systems.
2
ADMINISTRATTVF - INTFPNAI icr Niv
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP90M00005R000900070024-5
JanMINTCTDATTUr TKITrnkIni lArr
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP90M00005R000900070024-5
6. My assessment of the meeting is that the staffers understand the
Intelligence Community position and they are somewhat sympathetic to us on
the issue of resources. They are sceptical of DIA's ability to remain
impartial in their role as "primary action agent" for the Intelligence
Community. Although I do not know the results of their meetings with DoD, I
believe that DoD will continue to resist doing any real weapons systems net
assessments. In that case, I suspect that we will receive further guidance
from the Senate Armed Services Committee. I think it likely that DoD and
the Intelligence Community will be directed to do Interagency Net
Assessments of certain weapons system selected by the Senate Armed Services
Committee. There is also the possibility, which I think is less likely at
this time, that the Intelligence community will be directed to conduct net
assessments on our own. I will keep you informed as more information
becomes available.
110 arry I Btrair?
cc: Director/OCA
DDI
Distribution:
Orig - Addressee
1 - DDCI
1 - D/OCR
1 - DDI
1 - C/NIC
1 - Executive Registry
2 - NIO/GPF Files
3
ADMINISTRATIVE - INTERNAL USE ONLY
neclassified and Approved For Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP90M00005R000900070024-5