SUGGESTED STATEMENT OF ORGANIZATION AND RELATIONSHIP OF REVIEW PANEL TO PFIAB

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP98S00099R000400760006-7
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 27, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 21, 2012
• Sequence Number: 6
• Publication Date: August 21, 1981
• Content Type: MEMO

Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/05/21 : CIA-RDP98S00099R000400760006-7
21 August 1981
SUBJECT: Suggested Statement of Organization and Relationship
of Review Panel to PFIAB
1. The Panel should report directly to the DDCI and be
attached to his office. This will provide appropriate stature,
ensure full cooperation from community elements, and give the
necessary visibility to the Panel and its activities. The
Intelligence Community Staff should be tasked to provide the
needed support, e.g., collection and processing of data,
preliminary drafting, etc.
2. It is anticipated that the Panel's work will be of
interest to the PFIAB. Any formal relationship between the
two organizations should wait upon discussions with the latter
upon its reestablishment, however, and should not diminish the
primacy of the DDCI's authority over the Panel.
STAT
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/05/21 : CIA-RDP98S00099R000400760006-7
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/05/21 : CIA-RDP98S00099R000400760006-7
19 August 1981
SUBJECT: Some Thoughts on Role of SRP
1. There is a need for a continuing examination of the
performance and capabilities of the intelligence community
along the lines indicated by the DDCI.
2. The SRP believes it is capable of carrying out this
mission and stands ready to do so if asked.
3. The Panel does not believe it could perform effectively
in this role unless it reported directly to the DCI/DDCI. Any
ties to the IC Staff should be for the purpose of obtaining staff
support. White House recognition of such a panel would be useful,
but not necessary.
4. The present size of the Panel (4) is about right for the
job. Additions to the Panel on an ad hoc basis, or the use of
consultants as needed, should be provided for.
5. Issues selected for examination should be of significance,
and the purpose of such examinations should be to establish a
'basis for recommending improvements in the process of providing
intelligence.
6. Any other Panel activities, such as a continuation of
part of its current work, should be of secondary priority and,
in any case, should be decided on only after D/NFAC and C/NIC
have expressed their views on the need for and manner of using
such services.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/05/21 : CIA-RDP98S00099R000400760006-7
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/05/21 : CIA-RDP98S00099R000400760006-7
1 11 AugusL l:ial
MLMORAN DUM FOR: 5111' Colleagues
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Thoughts for the DDCI
If the opportunity arises in this afternoon's meeting, I
suggest that the following points be made to the DDCI:
1. The basic role for which the Panel was formed and its sub-
sequent members recruited was to provide an independent, substantive,
and collegial review of major intelligence products of the NIC and
NFAC, focussing on such questions as: (a) pointing up issues in a
form most useful to policymakers; (b) providing balanced coverage
of all relevant aspects and all critical issues; (c) defining
sharply genuine differences of view and clearly identifying the
nature of such differences; and (d) making adequate use of qualified
outside advice. (Drawn in substance from 19 January Memo to Bross.)
2. This role is most effectively performed in relation to
papers at two critical stages: (a) the original formulation of
Concept drafts and Terms of Reference and (b) a semi-finished
draft at the stage when an NIO considers it ready for circulation
to NFIB Representatives. For major NFAC papers with a strong policy
orientation (which in practice are often difficult to distinguish
from NIEs or other interagency products), similar arrangements
should be institutued.
3. Although tie review by the Panel should be kept "off-line"
in the sense that Panel clearance is not required for publication,
procedu*i should be revised to ensure that Panel suggestions are
given serious consideration, and that reasons are given for rejecting
such suggestions when they are not adopted. The Panel is prepared
to perform reviews rapidly, in order not to interfere with the new
streamlined procedures.
4. With the formal separation of the NIC from NFAC, some regu-
larization of the Panel's status and lines of responsibility would
be desirable. There is no need to shift the administrative location
of the Panel, so long as it is understood that its priority task if
to serve both the NIC and the D/NFAC in the role described above.
Experience demonstrates that such reviews require less than the full
time of the Panel, so that competing claims on time are unlikely to
arise.
S. For its remaining time, the Panel as a group, or its Members
as individuals, should be available for ad hoc assignments from
DCI, DDCI, D/NFAC, or C/NIC.
6. For some types of special assignments, it might be desirable
to add ad hoc members to the Panel. For its main task, the present
size and array of special interests appears adquate.
STAT
STAT
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/05/21 : CIA-RDP98S00099R000400760006-7