ODP'S FUTURE TERMINAL POLICY

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 12
• Document Creation Date: December 27, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 27, 2012
• Sequence Number: 13
• Publication Date: June 6, 1980
• Content Type: MEMO

Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
STAT
MEMORANDUM FOR: Chief, Management Staff
Office of Data Processing
Deputy Director for Applications
Office of Data Processing
STAT
STAT
SUBJECT: ODP's Future Terminal Policy
REFERENCE: Your memo, same subject, dtd. 22 May 1980
1. Attached are the comments you requested in the
reference on ODP's future Terminal Policy. If I can answer
any questions on this mat
STAT
Attachment: a/s
DD/ODP
Distribution:
Original - Addressee
1 - C/D Div.
1 - C/B Div.
1 - D Div. Chrono
2 - DD/A Chrono
2 - ODP Registry
T `'slfled
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
, f ATTACHMENT
.1 1
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
APPLICATIONS/ODP
 ..... ..........
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
Generally, the form should be expanded to include
all the options possible on the Delta Data. In truth it is
a computer and should be treated as such. The form could be
used for maintaining the inventory of DP equipment required
by law. The larger issue is who is to configure the DD for
each installation. This could be a large job. Any DD
installation whether standalone or connected to mainframes
should be recorded.
More specifically, terminal capabilities/
configurations should include "other graphics" or "graphics"
without specifying Tektronix and, "word processor".
BASIC capability should be a subset of CRT since some
requirements could be met with 5260 terminals in inventory
or turned in.
Rather than expand usage section just have "other
(specify)".
Yes, the form should address word processing.
No, both connected and stand-alone word processing
systems should be included.
Yes, the users are becoming keenly aware of the need to
plan for relocations.
No - user should specify a replacement as a new
terminal if the requirement (eg. BASIC package) dictates
replacement - otherwise ODP determines replacement schedule.
Of course, some flexibility for individual cases should
exist.
ODP would determine replacement when i) present
terminal fails; ii) requirements dictate new capability;
iii) inventory available.
STAT
Ideally, users should only provide info on component
budgeted terminals if these terminals are to be connected to
ODP facilities. However, if a central inventory is required
this information should be furnished to ODP. Consider the
DD 7260 as a WP.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
No, indicating a limitation based on capability to
install serves no useful purpose when soliciting
requirements.
Yes, ODP should provide reliable, accurate
accounting data for terminal usage and should refuse to
honor increases in the number of terminals and should
reclaim low usage terminals.
cc #?U EJ XPY4 PA7t, )
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27 : CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
Obviously, this policy must allow for exceptions.
Alternatively, ODP could charge a basic rental/month per
terminal in addition to a connect time charge. Such charges
would provide a user incentive to reduce the number of
terminals with low usage.
ODP must produce this data to manage terminal
resources. A report should be sent to the ADP Control
Officer to identify component terminal problems. (See
I . A. 4. e . above)
Furthermore, models could be developed for
predicting probability of finding an unoccupied terminal
given the number of terminal in an area, the number of
analysts frequenting the area, etc. This would be useful in
developing other criteria for more or less terminals in any
area besides the simple usage statistics.
No, a different priority scheme would not add to
the solution. The priority in this section is mostly
independent of installation priority.
One constant problem is relocations caused by
moves. Some thought to making this higher in priority
should be considered without directorate level intervention.
Another problem is offices not getting the number
of terminals required to support a program package yet
having the package approved in the Agency budget. DP
resources are no different that pencils, people, etc.
ACCEPTANCE QUESTIONS
The procedure is logical - see no advantage in
changing it.
No. Limits and quotes are on number of terminals.
Obviously, if the number of terminals requires a new COMTEN
then the COMTEN is put in the budget at the appropriate
level. Let the budget approval cycle determine the upper
limit.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27 : CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
axe.+_cs csc.~
But, the number of terminals should equal the
number required to execute the program approved, Again,
terminals and DP equipment or no different from other
resources required to execute the program.
The process should include a consideration for the
impact on the performance of ODP systems. Engineering
Division and Management Staff should be using this as data
for planning new systems. There comes a point where the
number of terminals and the number of users will require a
more powerful CPU and additional data communications
capacity.
~Cp,r~r~~ltc~ i'kd f47C i
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
The user should state requirements - ODP's mission
is to evaluate and implement options to satisfy their
requirements.
It should be ODP policy that SAFE terminals will
also be used for ODP central
services. The number of terminals for CRAFT, SAFE, CLASS A
should be separately identified since there is no uniform
policy as to whether ODP funds will be used.
Yes, SAFE, CRAFT, CLASSA priorities should be
separated, again, until it is decided that ODP will fund
these terminals in its budget.
it is assumed so, since ODP is not allocating any
resources to SAFE, CRAFT or CLASS A installation now.
I. C. 2.g.
Yes, most critical are OC resources. They should
be considered, definitely, at all levels.
Only budgeted, or approved figures should be in the
LRP - what other information is there?
Perhaps, just a summary. What purpose would it
have in the LRP?
Just general classes?
Classes of terminals to reflect the types listed in
the requirement document should be included in the LRP.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
~;,p~~ e{ Ers 4,
Reports should be coordinated within ODP to avoid
duplication, ensure accuracy, and to assign a data base
manager.
Users should not see this information on a routine
basis, ADP control officers should be notified of shortfalls
or of delays in installation.
Management Staff should be the focal point to
coordinate the response to OC. Preparation should be done
by line components involved, mainly Engineering Division.
The terminal and commo requirements forwarded to OC should
be as in the last ODP submission and should reflect figures
in the ODP LRP.
Contacts at planning, budget, and working level are
needed to coordinate plans. OL and/or OS involvement is not
needed on a regular basis.
The planning officers in ODP and OC should attend
the working group meetings. The WG role should not include
planning.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
 ... ... .. ..
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
INSTALLATION/TRACKING QUESTIONS
Generally, ODP Policy should be that any terminal
connected to ODP facilities or maintained by ODP must be
transferred to the ODP property account independent of the
source of funds. Any other course is a waste of any
resources. A nagging question in the future will be the
standalone DD as a WP. What about the implications of an
audit in this area?
See above. ODP buys - ODP property account. Component
buys - component account unless connected to ODP service, or
maintained by ODP - then ODP account. The whole purpose of
a straight forward accountability policy is to eliminate
unnecessary questions in replacing, maintaining, and moving
terminals. Perhaps the responsibilities of the equipment
custodian should be reinforced?
No. The basic planning problem is anticipating the
problems the Agency will be facing in the future. Since our
business is intelligence this is almost impossible.
Therefore, ODP should not be concerned that priorities
change from the time of requirements submission to the time
a TR is submitted. Even ODP has changed priorities over a
two year period. Tracking priorities does not serve any
apparently useful purpose. Adhering to a
first-come-first-serve install basis, all other factors
being equal, would make the ground rul% understood by all.
ED should have total responsibility for the management
of terminal installations under the guidance of a written
ODP policy. One reasonable policy might be relocations for
moving purposes come first and everything else enters a FIFO
queue. Of course, there may be exceptions.
The TR form serves the tracking role. ED should have
the responsibility to manage installation and to report
status. ED should also identify needed resources in their
program submission. A joint MBO is not recommended.
All options and software releases. How will ED and
Applications do their jobs properly.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
First ODP must decide which component will have
accountability for overseas terminals. If ODP has the
accountability then ODP should track nomenclature, serial
number and location. If OC has maintenance responsibility,
then OC should track replacement stock.
Yes. ODP should provide a periodic status report to
the ADP Control Officers that contains summary information
and incorporates the TR by reference to the TRN. At least
they will believe something is happening and someone cares!
ODP is responsible for terminal management. A policy
that reclaims unused terminals and satisfies outstanding
requests with the reclaimed terminals would be appropriate.
In short, use to obsolence or vanishing requirements.
The site preparation charge should be noted on the form
and an average charge should be allocated to each new
terminal and to each terminal moved to another location.
The component should be given an estimate of actual charges
at the time of the site survey.
SECURITY QUESTIONS
If the component funded terminal is to be maintained by
ODP, the terminal should be ordered by ODP and transferred
to the ODP property account.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
No. Security policy and quidelines for floppy disks
are the responsibility of the office of Security.
ODP should provide a positive indication to the
operator that a floppy disk is inserted in the system.
Floppy disks should be secured in the same manner as
typewriter ribbons or magnetic cards.
How can requirements a program time be coordinated
with current year installations.
The mechanics of the system work well although ODP
may be faced with difficulty in installing the number of
terminals requested.
How can components be certain of getting the
terminals they need to support program packages approved in
the Agency Budget? Installed in a timely fashion?
How can we get all ODP components ready to answer
questions on the new terminal and prepare for the heavy
training requirements?
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0
? li 4 r' F d 7. q., i
The ODP Computer Terminal Procurement Plan should
be issued annually in September, or earlier, and should be
incorporated in the ODP LRP. The Procurement Plan itself
should not be distributed to users but should form the basis
of requirements sent to OL and OC.
Policy should be articulated on all aspects covered
in the paper where there is joint responsiblity within ODP.
Also, system availability to the end user needs to be
addressed.
Should ODP manage all Agency terminals?
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP95-00972R000100160013-0