CHAIRMAN'S REPORT ON RECORDS MANAGEMENT BOARD

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP73-00402R000100050008-1
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 14, 2006
• Sequence Number: 8
• Publication Date: May 6, 1969
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Release 2006/12/14: CIA--PQ 71:1 00402ROO0100050008-1
6 May 1969
MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director for Support
THROUGH : Chief, Support Services Staff
SUBJECT Chairman's Report on Records Management Board
1. Attached is the quarterly report of the Records Management
Board which I believe shows significant improvements. Its four recom-
mended proposals require approval in principle before action may be
initiated.
2. Effective operation of the Board continues to be impeded by:
a. the loyalty of members to the components they represent;
b. the normal job responsibilities which prevent members
from giving full attention to the business of the Board
as an Agency mechanism; and
c. the lack of staff support for the Board and its individual
members limits their studies of problems and recommendations
for solutions.
3. During this quarter I pointed out to the Board that five areas
deposit more than 70% of the total 100,000-cubic foot volume at the
Records Center:
DDP/RID
21,000
DDI/OBGI
20,000
DDS/Finance
12,000
DDI/CRS
11,000
DDI/NPIC
7,000
71,000 cu. ft.
Of all 59 depositors, greater time and effort should be given these five
and to a lesser degree some eight others with 1,000 to 3,000 cu. ft.
each. The remaining 46 components deposit less than 10% of the volume
at the Records Center and need little concern. The Board members ob-
jected. They explained the great effort being made and insisted that
these five should not be singled out:
SECRET emu?,
d0w~g84.1ng and
' d?tf?, ';iC;'iiq
 Approved Far Release 2006/12/14
73-00402R0001 00050008-1
Roff
a. The DDI representative indicated OBGI and CRS promised to
eliminate 8,000 and 4,000 cu. ft. respectively and to
focus on them might be resented and counterproductive.
b. The DDS respresentative explained that the Office of
Finance is required to keep payroll records 56 years and
vouchers 12.
?c. The DDP representative stated the 21,000 was not RID's, it
represented deposits from the entire Directorate. RID can-
.not.subdivide the total into Area Divisions because all
but two Divisions send old records to RID where they are
boxed together and sent to the.Center as an RID deposit.
4. Later, I showed the members that.these same five areas also had.
more than 65% of the volume of records now in the Headquarters buildings.
(See list attached). I insisted that such major problem areas should
have total Records Management Programs with two or three high-level
Records Officers rather than partial Programs with unqualified, part
time title holders. I suggested we urge Management to focus on these
major areas. Again the vehement responses objected to their being
singled out:
a. The DDP representative said DDP has a superior Records
Program with an RMO in each Area Division and a CS Records
Committee of Division Chiefs with the DDP himself as
Chairman. They also have trained and assigned another
240 CS Records Officers to screen paper-by-paper all CS
files, in addition to their regular duties.
b. The Office of Finance Executive Officer has been working on
their records problems and they recently sent their,Registry
clerk to a 2-week records course and appointed her to.be the
Records Management Officer.
c. The DDI representative said they'have RMO's and Blue Ribbon
Records Panels. Also he felt certain NPIC would soon make
a policy decision about the location for its Vital Records
and this might move 3,000 cu. ft. of films out of the Center.
While concentrated attention to these five areas seems to be a logical
next phase for the Board's effort, the atmosphere and attitude of in-
dividual members are such that a directive to proceed in this way would
be counterproductive.
5. After the defense comes the counter attack. The DDP Board
representative was especially critical of the DDS Directorate Program
and the Agency's Central Staff. He felt they were too small to do the
size job they faced. He feels they should offer more records training,
SECRET
 Approved For Release 2006/12/14 SEC 73-00402R0001 00050008-1
policy guidance, systems surveys, and assistance with forms and equip-
ment. He said the DDP Program Staff includes a GS-16, 15, 13, and 11
plus clerical support. The DDS Program, he went on, with an equal
volume of records has a part-time GS-13 alone. On the Agency's Central
Records Staff I have the remaining half of him part time plus another
13 and two 12's with two clerks. The DCI representative protested that
he is far too busy with his cables to be able to supervise the Records
Program in any other offices in the DCI area. He said he has no time
or staff for surveys and little time for meetings. The DDI representative
is a full-time GS-13 but without any staff and only borrowed clerical
support. The assigned DDS&T representative is their Registry Chief,
GS-11. Without an overall Centralized Program and Records Career Program,
each member responds to the requests, priorities, and direction of his
own supervisor consistent with the present decentralized Program policy.
6. A separate and perhaps more effective deterrent to progress of
the Purge is the controlling influence of the CI Staff over the reten-
tion of records beyond government requirements. This has been par-
ticularly important in the cases of DDP/RID and the Offices of Finance
and Personnel. Coordination meetings with CI concluded that unaccepted
Personnel Applications, required to be kept two years, will be kept in-
definitely and Financial Expense Accounting Vouchers, required to be kept
twelve years, are to be held 30 years. An even more-striking CI in-
fluence is in the exacting review procedure the DDP/RMO reported:
"These CI responsibilities led to the formulation of strict
criteria regarding document destruction ... Destruction is
carried out through a painstaking, tedius process beginning
with a paper-by-paper review by a qualified desk individual
prior to a recommendation for destruction and continues through
at least two more check points before a document is physically
destroyed."
There is no Agency Policy or regulation giving CI Staff the role they
have assumed controlling records retention. They derive it from their
counter intelligence mission.
7. The members are certain the Purge is not the long-term solution
to the Agency Records volume. All of them contributed to the temporary
successes of the Purges in 1957-58 (15,000 cu. ft.), 1963-67 (55,000 ,
and 1969 (13,000).as well as the 1968 three-month Office Cleanup
Campaign (18,000). Most of the members are dedicated, hardworking
Records Managers in the professional sense. They believe the total
Program is valid and can succeed if someone is available to run it in
the office concerned.
8.. I believe the Board should continue to function. It serves as
a channel to the decentralized programs. It is responsible for stimu-
lating and implementing the current screening effort which must continue
SECRET
 Approved For Release 2006/12/14: O C i-00402R000100050008-1
indefinitely, preferably in the formal Purge environment. This Board
system is the best available forum to develop and evaluate new alternative
solutions for the,Agency Records Problems as long as the present policy,
-structure, and regulation prevail. Its long term role, and the solution
to the other problems described in earlier paragraphs, cannot be solved
by the Board itself in the present environment. I would hope that the
study group you have asked Ito create will offer recommenda- 25X1
tions to deal with these as well as the other problems indentified by
the Chief, SSS in his briefing a few leeks ago_
Chairman
Records Management Board
Attachments:
Volumes of Records List
Board's Quarterly Report
25X1
SECRET