DOCUMENTATION, THE WHOLE STORY

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: STARGATE
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP96-00788R001200050007-8
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: November 4, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 19, 1998
• Sequence Number: 7
• Publication Date: February 14, 1984
• Content Type: LETTER

roved For Release 2000/08/07 CIA-RDP96-00788R001200050007-8
H
EN
TO Ingo Swann DATE. 14 February 1984
FROM Hal Puthoff
LOCATION G-219
SUBJECT: Documentation, The Whole Story
cc
You asked me in our last telcon why the documentation issue keeps coming up, and
where is the pressure coming from. Therefore, I thought I would write down the whole
story. SG1J
At the beginning of FY '81, proposed to his organization and others that a
concentrated three-year-period be given SRI to determine whether RV was.a-special
gift of "a
few (In
h
h
.
ic
w
case_ though_-itifi
., scen-cal_ly_interesting,. could not. be
which co-u-1: e'transferred to trainees and thereby become a useful tool, specifically
with the thought in mind that, if successful, his organization would begin to train
people
.
SRI accepted the challenge in-th-e__belief_,.that RV was a: robust phenomenon that could
be so trained. It was left up to SRI as to how to proceed. We could contract with
you to develop a program, develop one ourselves based on what we had learned over
the years, subcontract to Monroe, etc., etc. As Project Director I opted to subcontract
that effort to you, and work with you, as I thought that would give us our best shot,
a decision I still. consider valid.
At the end of the three-year period we attested that we had to first orde
r achieved
our goal, although admitting (as did you, in the Science Panel briefing) that we still
had full documentation of this achievement left to do. Our sponsor (via SG1J
represented that the goal had apparently been achieved, but realized that documentation
would have-to be pursued vigorously in FY '84 to provide the necessary backup so that
the client would not be embarrassed about its investment, especially as they expanded
into the R&D community for support, and this was the message to SRI. The client had
provided funds to SRI to come up with a training program (which would, of course,
include some kind of documentation), and at this point SRI was in arrears. At this
point it should be noted that it was SRI, not Swann, that had a problem.. What arrangement;
agreements, etc., we make with our consultants is SRI-internal business; this is where
you are shielded. It is SRI who is responsible for meeting requirements; whether we
meet them with your help, do it ourselves, or with the help of other consultants is our
business. All the client requires is that it be in a defensible position to move forward
with a training program, training its own personnel in FY '85, or decide that it
cannot be done.
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001200050007-8
 Approved .For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001200050007-8
SG1J
As the new fiscal year got underway, it appeared to that SRI was not going to
be able to meet its obligation with regard to documentation, whatever the reason, so
he decided to step in. As a result of my "circles" memo, he recognized that this was
not an appropriate tack to take, so he stepped back.
All of the above you know. Now we get to the part that will be new for you, the price
I paid for defending that position. I was called in and told that SRI as an organization,
and I as a Project Director, had not met our obligation to provide a viable defdnsible
product for what had been invested with regard to whether training was feasible.
Therefore, the project was stopped (I.don't mean CRV R&D; I mean everything, intell,
search, etc.), and I was told that I had failed as a Project Director, and essentially,
went the way of Russell...i.e., no charge number.-(Again, I point out that none of this
involved you in any way. Our arrangements with you were our own business; this was
strictly a client-SRI problem.) In the following period of negotiation to determine
whether. the relationship should be severed._.permanently, :or_whether SRI could meet its
obligati on mgr the' c2irent I argued that?_ thought training was still a viable concept,
although I could not at this point provide documentation to prove it; that I thought
it would be folly to write off training because of not yet having provided documentation,
since we would in effect be throwing out the baby with the bathwater; and that, if given
a chance, the training concept as a concept could be documented.. On that basis, the
SRI contract was-re-instated with me on probation as Project Director, I-am obliged to
document in any way I can the concept that training is a viable concept. I can do it
on the basis of working with you to document progress with the other client's trainees;
I can set up my own training program using any technique I like, even if it is simply
IEEE-style RV; I can subcontract to anyone else, etc. The bottom line is that, as a
result of my experience over the past decade, I feel that training as a concept is
viable, primarily because of what I have observed working with you. My job at this
point is to provide documentation that that feeling has a scientific basis, and I.
can do that any way I like. There is no pressure on you,(as this is not your obligation;,
you have done your job), nor is there any pressure on me to utilize you or your method
to provide this documentation... how I meet this requirement is up to me.
Obviously, since I think your approach is excellent, I would prefer to document the
training concept on the basis of your approach. Therefore, although not obligated
to meet this requirement on the basis of your approach, I nonetheless wanted to pursue
with you as hard as I could whether there was a way to obtain documentation on your
method with your cooperation and agreement. For reasons you stated, and which I
eventually supported, it was not appropriate to do so with the core R&D,group. Given
that there was not time for you to work with me on this with a new group because of
the committments to a second client (which were necessary, given the chronology of
funding, etc.), I was naturally led to see if there was a way you and I could work
together to obtain some documentation (although it was not required) with the new
trainees. The pressure therefore came from me, not anyone else, because if a way
could have been worked out that would not infringe on that training, I thought it
would be best that that the training concept be verified on the basis of your system,
not some other. You have indicated to me why that is not appropriate, given the
committment to high-quality ops requirements, and I have accepted that, and duplicated
precisely why, as evidenced by my "crystal-growing" memo. If it should turn out that
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001200050007-8
 Approved For Release 2000/08/07: CIA-RDP96-00788 R001200050007-8
we can take advantage of an opportunity for a few Class B's along the way, e.g., at
the end of Si, Ph 1, ...etc., without being invasive, then that obviously helps the
cause. If you decide that that cannot be done, then so be it. So that you know that
you have the breathing room you need, I want you to know that I have arranged it that
no one holds you responsible for meeting the documentation requirement, as I have taken
the position that you are protected by your position as a consultant and by the agreement
you and I make on the basis of technical issues, that the documentation issue rests
entirely on my shoulders, that it is SRI and I as Project Director who are responsible.
I have thus deflected the issue so that it is my credibility, not yours, that is called
into question. That is the best lean do.
There you have exactly where I am, scarred though I may be. I must move forward with
some effort to document training as a concept, a,,nd_I can do it any way I choose, but I
must do it. I will accept your suggestion that I)should consider training sore individuals
myself in order to document the concept of training as a concept, and I shall also
follow up on your suggestion that we arrange for meetings with Dean Jahn, Dixon or whomeve
is appropriate for the eventual documentation studies required with regard to your concepi
of training, so that we don't lose what has been developed on that track. That is the
only strategy I have at this point to provide you the safe space to deliver the product
that you are committed to deliver, and to provide SRI the safe space to provide that
safe space, and to insure that all the previous effort does not get not-iced.
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001200050007-8