COMMITTEE ON DOCUMENTATION REPORT OF TASK TEAM IV (INSTALLATIONS)

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 27
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 14, 2005
• Sequence Number: 9
• Publication Date: January 5, 1966
• Content Type: MF

Approved Fes;-Release 204917Ii4-RDP82M007R001400090009-9
USIB-D-39. 7/13
5 January 1966,
UNITED
STATES INTELLIGENCE BOAR D
SUBJECT
Committee on Documentation Report of
Task Team IV (Installations)
REFERENCES
a
b.
USIB-D-39. 7/6, 6 May 1964
USIB-M-322, 29 April 1964, item 5
c.
USIB-D-39. 7/5, 16 March 1964
1. The enclosed report by the Committee on Documentation (CODIB)
on the study undertaken by CODIB's Task Team IV (Installations), pursuant
to T.TSI.B dir. ec_tion in reference a. , is submitted for USIB consideration of
the Recommendations contained in Section D, pages 9 and 10,
2. This report is the first response to the USIB action at its meeting
on 29 .April. 1964 (reference b. ) approving as amended the CODTB r.ecom-
mend.a.tion.s an. pages 20, 21 and. 22 of the Stage I Report of the Staff for the
Community Information Processing Study (SCIPS) (reference c, ). Pursuant
thereto, nine Task Teams were established by CODIB to report on Para-
gra.phs 4. a. through j, of the fin.al UTSIB-approved recommendations
contained in, the attachment to reference a. These Task Team Reports, as
they are completed, are being reviewed by CODJB which will then submit
as appropriate. its report and recommendations for USIB consideration,
3. Spec i.fieeally the enclosed CODIB report and its attached Task Team IV
report are a response to Recommendation 4. d, of the final TJSIB-approved
recommendations regarding the SCIPS Report which directed CODIB to
establish an ad ht,'~ groiu.p. to "develop a standard installation description
format". The en.c:.osed CODTB report contains a Summary of Task Team
Findings; CODTB Comments on the Task Team Report; and in Section D,
pages 9 and. 10, CODI.B's Recommendations to USJ:B,
'6.-
o'd
GROUP 1
Excluded from automatic
downgrading and
declassification
: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
SECRET
 Approved FQVRelease 2ITIA-RDP82M00,Q,7R001400090009-9
USIB-D-39. 7/13
5 January 1966
4. The enclosure and its attachment will be scheduled on the agenda
for USIB consideration at an early date, probably 27 January 1966.
Executive Secre a 25X1
- 2 -
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
SECRET
 Approved FgroRelease 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00QJR001400090009-9
CONFIDENTIAL (When Filled In)
LIMITED DISTRIBUTION LIST
USIB-D-39. 7/13
Date 5 January 1966
Classification SECRET
Intelligence Board Members and
Service Intelligence Chiefs
State No. Copies USIB Committees No. Copies
DIA 5
NSA CCPC
3 CODIB 125
AEC 1 COMOR
FBI 1
EIC
Army 5 GMAIC
Navy 2 JAEIC
Security
Air Force 7 SIC
SIGINT
CIA Internal Watch
Ex. Registry 2
DCI
DDCI
Executive Director 1 Other External
D/DCI/NIPE 2
DD/I 6 Executive Secretary, NSC
DD/P 1 President's Foreign Intelligence
DD/S 1 Advisory Board
DD/S&' ' 3
AD/ CT 1
AD/ NE 3
AD/SI 1
AD/ RR 2
AD/CR 2 Special Instructions
AD/BI
AD/ O
DD/ I/ CGS 5
Director, NPIC
Director, Security 1
Director, Communications
General Counsel
IG
Chief, Estimates Staff, ONE
USIB Secretariat 11
CONFIDENTIAL (When Filled In)
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M0009 R001400090009-9
 Approved F -'Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00W'R001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
CODIB-D-111/ 1.4/7
21 December 1965 ,
Final CODIB Approved
UNITED STATES INTELLIGENCE BOARD
COMMITTEE ON DOCUMENTATION
REPORT OF TASK TEAM IV (INSTALLATIONS)
REFERENCES: a. USIB-D-39.7/6 (6 May 1964)
b. CODIB-D-111/1.4 Series (29 Dec 64 - 25 Oct 65)
A. Background
This is a report on the study undertaken by CODIB's Task Team IV
(Installations) pursuant to USIB direction contained in reference (a). The objective
of the task assigned to this Task Team, conipletion of which is now reported, was
to develop a uniform format(s) for the identification of physical installations and
geographic features of intelligence interest to facilitate the processing and exchange
of intelligence information and documents thereon.
B. Summary of Task Team Findings
1. General
The Task Team IV report (attached) addresses itself primarily to two
basic issuevi
GROUP I
Excluded from automatic
downgrading and
declassification
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved F elease 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M008 R001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
a. What elements of information are required for positive identification
of new installations, and
b. What code conventions should be used in representing each of these
identifying elements.
Subjects not covered in the report, on which we will have some comment in the next
section, include Community control and enforcement procedures, implementation/
conversion scheduling, delegation of "executive agent" responsibilities, security
problems, etc.
2. Elements of Information
In attempting to develop a uniform format for installations, the Task
Team distinguished between what it termed "descriptive" and "identificatory"
factors used for installations, as well as between the differing needs for initial
and subsequent identification of installations. Concerning the former, the Team
concluded after examination of the hundreds of different elements of information
used for various categories of installations in Community installation files that
some of the factors used are entirely identificatory, others are completely
descriptive, and some are both identificatory and descriptive. With regard to
the distinction between initial and subsequent identification, the Team noted
that in determining whether to add a new installation to the intelligence data
base a number of identificatory elements are required, but that the subsequent
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved F?, Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00WR001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
identification of already established installations is a far simpler matter necessitating,
perhaps, only the identification number of the installation or, at the maximum,
identification number and function code.
After intensive exploration of the minimum number of elements required
for identification of new installations (or geographic features) of intelligence interest
the Task Team concluded that four elements are, in themselves, sufficient to
achieve positive identification. These factors are:
a. Identifying number
b. Category code (identifying the function of the installation)
c. Name of the installation or geographic feature
d. Coordinates of the location of the installation
A fifth element, namely, an indicator for the country in which the installation is
located, was considered desirable but not required for positive identification.
3. Code Convention
Concerning the means for representing the above four elements of information,
the Task Team recommended the following:
a. That the installation numbering system be that employed in the
DIA Automated Intelligence File (AIF).
b. That the functional category code and name systems be those used
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved F elease 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00GQiWR001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
by DIA, as described in its "Handbook for Installation Naming and
Functional Classification" (DIAM 65-3-1).
c. That geocoordinates and/or UTM Grid coordinates be employed,
together with the DIA system for deriving said coordinates (as
described in its "Point Reference Guide Book") and referencing
the source from which the coordinates were obtained.
4. Community Impact
The Task Team was faced with the problem of devising a format providing
for a variety of interests (information processing, dissemination, collection guidance,
installation analysis, etc.), for the inclusion of identifying elements in a variety of
information processing systems (manual, EAM, EDP, etc.), and for the use of elements
found in both machine-structured and indexed narrative systems. Its investigations
led it to the conclusion that adoption of the four elements recommended for positive
identification of new installations will have a minimal adverse impact on the holdings
and procedures of the agencies concerned, and that the positive gains in terms of
increased accuracy and speed in interchange of information, as well as the reduction
in the confusion caused by the use of differing identification systems in the several
agencies, should far offset any adverse impact that might result,
C. CODIB Comment on Report
1. General
In the view of CODIB, this report deserves more than usual attention for the
S-E-C-R.E-T
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved Foelease 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M0001001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
reason that it addresses a number of problems which we will find are common to
all on-going efforts to standardize Community activities in information processing.
Further, since decisions in this particular subject area (i. e. , installation control)
may tend to set the precedents for the handling of similar problems in other subject
areas as well, an attitude of caution seems warranted.
CODIB agrees in general with the Task Team that the use of the four factors
recommended will permit the positive identification of installations, and that
Community wide use of these elements (and standardized code systems for
representing same) will greatly simplify the communication problem. We commend
the Task Team for the excellence of its effort, and believe that if its basic proposals
can be implemented in practice without undue stress and conflict, it will constitute a
significant achievement. In order, however, to minimize the difficulties which
might arise and to increase the chances of successful implementation, we feel
obliged to qualify some of the Task Team's findings and recommendations, and to
draw attention to other aspects of the standardization problem which they did not
examine and which require further study and analysis. Our comments follow.
2. Identification Elements
It cannot be denied that, given the four identifying elements described,
any installation can be positively identified. However, it is also evident that the
reporting medium must contain these elements if the installation described therein
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved Fo elease 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82MO001R001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
is to be recognized. Unfortunately, this is not always the case (for example, in
Comint where the only reference may be to a Field Post Number) and nothing can
be done about it.
In brief, one can argue that other elements of information can be used to
positively identify an installation, though perhaps they are of lesser value statistically.
More important, however, the acceptance of the recommended elements should not
prohibit any agency from including additional identificatory or descriptive elements
in its records which might prove useful because of the nature of the reporting.. with
which it deals or because of the particular interests of its customers.
3. Prescribed Entries
If and when discussions with the control center responsible for determining
what the common entry should be for a given element of information (e.g., category
code) fail to produce agreement on said entry, the agency involved should be permitted
to carry an alternative entry, in addition to that prescribed, in its information records.
4. Specificity of Control
Where for reasons of manpower constraints, lack of internal customer
interest, or other, it would not be worth the effort to a member agency of the
Community to control certain types of installations (e. g. , beaches or railway
bridges) in the depth required, it should be given the right either to place more
generic controls over the data or to exclude such data entirely from its retrieval system.
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved Fgelease 2005/2E4CCi4 2Cf 82M000"R001400090009-9
5. Implementation/ Conversion Scheduling
The time schedule for conversion (if any) of extant files, or application of
any Community standards to newly-established files, should be the responsibility of
the individual agencies concerned, and can be expected to vary depending on such
factors as available funds, file media currently employed, plans for new systems
development, etc.
6. Securi
The Task Team report does not discuss some of the security problems which
may be encountered in a Community-supported file of installation data, and the
potentially disruptive influence this may have on achieving agreement with respect
to the values for the identifying elements. Certainly, this matter requires further
clarification before a truly Community-based file can be implemented.
7. Executive Agent Responsibility
A single agency should be assigned as the focal point for the introduction
and recommendation of new installations to be included in the Community data base,
and as the authority for controlling the identification elements pertaining thereto.
In this instance, we recommend that the Defense Intelligence Agency, with its
responsibilities with respect to the National Command Authority and the Intelligence
Community of the United States and Allied Nations, would be in the best position to
serve this function. Since it is evident, however, that vesting such control in a
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved Fcelease 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M000Q,2001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
single agency will bring about problems of communication relative to such matters
as updating, revising, and correcting files, as well as disseminating the pertinent
decisions -- all within an acceptable time frame -- it is understood that any agreement
on the adoption of Task Team IV's proposals will include the development and
demonstration in actual practice of working procedures for overcoming such problems
acceptable to d=-4-r
8. Functional Classification Code
In its present form, the category code contained in DIAM 65-3-1 does
not appear to be completely satisfactory for the description of certain kinds of
installations. It seems probable, however, that arrangements can be worked out to
modify or expand the code in such a way that the resultant product would be acceptable
to all concerned.
9. Installation Naming System
The proposed system for naming installations is somewhat restrictive
in that it limits the name field to 38 characters. If an agreement cannot be reached
which would permit an increased fixed-length, or variable-length, field for name,
some agencies may feel obliged to carry alternative versions of some names, in
addition to the standardized Community name, as cross-reference entries.
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved Fo elease 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M000Q 001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
10. Country Code
We recommend inclusion of the country code as the fifth identifying element.
In this connection, CODIB's Task Team I ( Content Control) is now completing a very
comprehensive analysis and definition of politico-geographic areas for intelligence
purposes. This analysis has turned up many anomalies and/or inconsistencies in
existing country codes' structures. When this project is finalized, we will probably
recommend its adoption not only for installation control but throughout the Community
wherever feasible.
D. Recommendations
It is recommended that USIB:
1. Note the general findings and conclusions of the Task Team IV report
and the above CODIB comments thereon.
2. Approve, as required elements for positive identification of installations
and geographic features, the four elements recommended in the report and a suitable
country code, as listed below:
a. Identifying number.
b. Category code (identifying the function of the installation).
c. Name of the installation or geographic feature.
d. Coordinates of the location of the installation.
e. . A suitable indicator for the country in which the installation is located,
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved Fo%gelease 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00090001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
3. Request the several member agencies to develop and submit to CODIB a
plan for implementing the use of the above-listed five elements of information and
implement the use of these elements in the prescribed manner to the maximum
feasible extent.
4. Assign the Defense Intelligence Agency executive agent responsiblities for
installations control on a trial basis.
5. Request the Defense Intelligence Agency to .develop for CODIB consideration:
a. The procedures to be adopted in the areas of communication, control,
and enforcement.
b. How security problems will be resolved if the data base will be
all-source.
c. A modified functional category code which.can be applied to all types
of installations.
d. An installation naming system which will permit an adequate fixed-
length field,
S-E-C-R-E-T
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved F*f Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00Q R001400090009-9
USIB-D-39. 7/13
CODIB-D-111/1.4/7
ATTACHMENT
U N I T E D S T A T E S I N T E L L I G E N C E B OAR D
FINAL REPORT
T/IV/R-1/1
Group 1
Excluded from automatic
downgrading and
declassification. 25X1
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved Fo&Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00& ?R001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
T/IV/R-1/1
12 October 1965
U N I T E D S T A T E S I N T E L L I G E N C E B 0 A R D
MEMORANDUM FOR: Chairman, Committee on Documentation
SUBJECT: Final Report of Task Team IV - Installations
1. Final Report (T/IV/R-1/1) of Task Team IV - Installations is
forwarded herewith.
2, Of the large number of elements used in the Intelligence
Community to identify and describe installations and geographic features
of intelligence interest, Task Team IV has concluded that four elements
are in themselves sufficient to achieve positive identification. These
factors are:
a.. Identifying number (peculiar to said installation or
geographic feature).
b. Category code, identifying the function of the
installation.
c. Name of the installation or geographic feature.
d. Geographic code, establishing the position of the
installation (and including the source of said coordinates).
Consideration was also given to the use of a country code, defining the
country in which the installation or feature is located..
3. In the selection of the four required factors, the Team kept
in mind the differing needs of initial and subsequent identification ol.
Group 1
Excluded from automatiAXi
downgrading and
declassification.
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved Felease 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
2 -
installations. Initial identification is involved in nominations for
adding new installations to the intelligence base. These require all
four factors to the extent possible. Subsequent identification by
elements of the Washington Intelligence Community of already established
installations is a simpler matter. From a purely ADP point of view, and
with respect to established as against new installations, two factors
would be sufficient; identification number of the installation and the
category code. However, the needs which the identification factors must
satisfy and the requirements to serve a variety of information processing
systems have resulted in the Task Team conclusion that the first four
factors should, with respect to new installations, be mandatory, and the
fifth highly desirable, but not mandatory.
4. The Task Team has concluded that adoption of the four elements
required for positive identification of new installations will have a.
minimal adverse impact on the holdings and procedures of agencies con-
cerned. The positive gains in terms of increased accuracy and speed in
interchange of information and reduction in the confusion caused by use
of differing identification systems in the several agencies should far
offset any adverse impact.
5. It may be of some interest to note that following completion of
the initial tasks of Task Team IV, the Commander-in-Chief, European
Command, reached the same conclusions. He requested permission to take
steps permitting the Supreme Allied Commander, Europe, to release to
NATO national units having strike assignments in support of operations
in Europe, specific identifying data with respect to targets. These data
were described as "common identifying data." for the attainment of com-
patibility of target documents and strike listings. He held that such
identifying data do not constitute intelligence precluding such distri-
bution. The elements recommended are:
Bombing Encyclopedia Number
Target Category Code
Name
Coordinates
Country Code
a. Has been fortunate in having available to the Team the
very considerable technical competence of the agencies concerned
with installations intelligence;
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved F ,'Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00WR001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
b. Has benefited considerably by the data furnished, the
judgments expressed, and by the many discussions by members of
the Task Team on the common task of enhancing the operational
efficiency of the Intelligence Community. The knowledge and
experience of Team members are reflected in the results achieved,
which are considered not to have any serious adverse impact on
the installations intelligence base supporting United States war
plans.
7, Informal Reactions: In accordance with the instructions of
CODIB, the Task Team has canvassed the appropriate elements of the Intel-
ligence Community for informal reactions to the Team's Interim Report.
A summary of the informal reactions obtained was submitted to the CODIB
Support Staff on 12 July 1965.
8. Points Raised by CODIB Chairman: Attachment 2 to CODIB-M-63
raised certain points with respect to the Interim Report. Written re-
sponses to all seven items were conveyed to the CODIB Support Staff on
16 July 1965, later reproduced as Attachment A to CODIB-D-111/1.4/3
dated 31 August 1965.
9. Points Raised by CODIB Support Staff: I 25X1
Chief of the CODIB Support Staff, in his memorandum CSS/MM-46, dated
22 June 1965 (Attachment 3 to CODIB-M-63) also furnished helpful comments.
With respect to the suggestion that a standard country code be required
as a fifth element for identification of installations and geographic
features, the Task Team is in accord. It was agreed, however, as indi-
cated in paragraph 10 of the Minutes of the 63rd Meeting, held by CODIB
on 24 June 1965, that the Task Team's report would go forward without
having to get agreement on a country code. Additionally, as pointed out
by the CODIB Support Staff, the problems of a country code system. are under-
going resolution as part of the responsibility assigned to CODIB Task
Team I. Attention was also called to the fact that the Report does not
identify the various records or files in the Community that should adopt
standard identification elements, nor establish a time table for con-
version to the recommended system. The Task Team does not believe it
appropriate (or even possible on a SECRET basis) to invade agency autonomy
and attempt to identify all of the records which might be affected in all
of the agencies concerned. With respect to a time schedule, the Task
Team concurs with the Central Intelligence Agency belief that it should
be the responsibility of the individual agencies concerned to establish
time schedules for conversion (if any) of extant files or the application
of any new community standards to newly established records. Additionally,
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved FQ,&Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00$37R001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
time schedules will vary depending upon such factors as available funds,
file media. currently employed, plans for new systems development, etc.
It was further recommended that CODIB request the members of this Task
Team to monitor conversions to assure its implementation in all agencies
and to report periodically to CODIB on the progress of the conversion.
The Task Team believes that monitorship of conversion and periodic
reports to CODIB is more properly assignable to the Executive Agent, the
appointment of which has been recommended by the Central Intelligence
Agency.
10. Formal Coordination: Formal coordination of the Report is
underway by CODIB. Formal reaction of the Central Intelligence Agency,
contained in memorandum of 16 August 1965 (Attachment B to CODIB-D-111/
1.4/3) is currently under study by the Defense Intelligence Agency. DIA
views on the CIA paper will be presented to CODIB through the DIA member.
11. Thoughts of the Task Team with Respect to the CIA Paper: Although
the reactions of the Task Team to the CIA paper have not been specifically
requested, the Task Team offers the following comments for whatever help
they may be. The Task Team is of the opinion that the reservations
expressed by CIA are very reasonable indeed in that they are designed to
insure agency autonomy while providing for uniform procedures within the
Intelligence Community for identification of installations in areas of
common or overlapping interest and responsibility. The conditions ex-
pressed by CIA, however, do not appear to be conducive to early imple-
mentation of the recommendations of the Task Team. CIA recommends that
authority should be vested in DIA as a single Executive Agent and while
in general appearing to support the recommendations of the Task Team,
states that CIA cannot permit itself to adopt the recommendations set
forth until certain problems.are addressed and resolved. The Task Team
believes that none of the problems cited by CIA is incapable of solution
in a. manner meeting the needs of the Intelligence Community, and it
believes that CODIB's responsibility for the resolution of such problems
and the drafting of the terms and conditions of such an Executive Agency
can most effectively be discharged by direct negotiations between appro-
priate elements of CIA and DIA, under overall CODIB monitorship. The
Team believes that appropriate agreement between CIA and DIA, without
detriment to the operational relationships between DIA and the U&S
Commands, can be reached while still meeting the legitimate requirements
of the Intelligence Community.
12. The suggestion of CIA that an interagency committee be estab-
lished, composed of analysts at the working level, to meet regularly
with the Executive Agent to discuss matters of mutual concern, appears
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved F-?Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00QWR001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
- 5 -
to the Task Team to be an inefficient and costly mechanism. It would
also contribute to still further proliferation of committees in the
Intelligence Community: Although DIA abides by the suggestion of CIA
that DIA be named as the Executive Agent and, in spite of the fact that
the recommended elements for identification are those in current use
by DIA, the Task Team concludes that acceptance by DIA of the respon-
sibilities of an Executive Agent would probably entail need for the
resolution of a number of problems within DIA. A more effective
mechanism would be required for the assignment of identification
numbers for installations. An expansion and/or re-formatting of the
name field might become necessary. Additional positional accuracy
data. (actual CEP) for the file might be required. The present functional
or category classifications may require expansion or revision. Support
or acceptance of installations in any and all functional classifications
might be entailed. Arrangements would probably have to be made for
acceptance of intelligence data for the AIF under sensitive security
controls. Arrangements would be required for changes in standard codes
to meet Intelligence Community requirements while preserving, at the
same time, the special operational relationships between DIA and the
Unified and Specified Commands. Additional resources would probably be
required in support of the data. base. Given, however, the cooperation
and good will of the agencies concerned, a workable agreement should be
possible and, when completed and in operation, this should serve to
enhance the resources and operations in this specialized field of the
Intelligence Community as a whole.
13. CIA-Recommended Follow-up Action: The various actions recom-
mended by CIA under this title and any subsequent implementation problems
are, in the judgment of the Task Team, more appropriately assignable to
CIA and DIA for direct negotiation rather than being assigned to a. CODIB-
monitored entity composed of representatives from a large number of
agencies.
14. The Task Team having concluded its assigned task of determining
and identifying the minimum number of elements required for positive iden-
tification of installations, has completed its assignment. It is the
desire of Task Team IV's members that they be permitted to retire from the
field, with the Team itself being retained on paper for a. reasonable
period (not to exceed 6 months) to enable reactivation at any time should
the views of the Team on interpretation of any portion of its Final Report
be required by CODIB, CIA, or DIA while engaged in converting the
recommendations of the Task Team into effectively functioning arrangements.
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 25X1 Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved F Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M001 8001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
N-O-F-O-R-N
Others who have contributed significantly to the work of the Team are
the following:
Lt. Cdr. Joe L. Elm, NAVY
Lt. Col. Robert W. Parks, NMCSSC (USA)
S-E-C-R-E-T
N-O-F-O-R-N
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved Felease 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00QR001400090009-9
T/IV/R-1/1
12 October 1965
FINAL REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY ............................................. ................ii
DISCUSSION ........................................................... 1
Installation Identification Number ................................ 3
Functional Classification Code .................................... 5
Name of the Installation or Geographic Feature .................... 7
Coordinates of the Location of the Installation ................... 16
Country Code ...................................................... 18
Conclusions ........................................................ 19
A Installation Identification Numbering System
B Category Code and Product Index
C Installation Naming Procedure for SAM Sites
D Sample Pages from Point Reference Guide Book
E Coordinate Reference Criteria
F Consolidated Format Requirements
G Format Coding Requirements
I
Group 1
Excluded from automatic
downgrading and 25X1
declas,?ification.
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved Fb1velease 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M000i1 R001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
SUMMARY
1. Task Team IV has concluded that four elements are required for
the positive identification of installations and geographic features of
intelligence interest. These elements are:
as Installation identification number.
b. A designator of the categories involved; in other words,
functional classification of the installation or geographic feature.
c. The name of the installation or geographic feature,
d. The coordinates (geographic and/or UTM) of the location
of the installation and the graphic source from which derived,
A fifth element--an indicator for the country in which the installation is
located--is desirable but not required for positive identification.
2. The Task Team recommends that the installation identification
system contained in the DIA Automated Intelligence File (AIF) be adopted
for use in this field by the Washington Intelligence Community, and that
the functional classification contained in the "Handbook for Installation
Naming and Functional Cla.ssificatiori'(DIAM 65-3-1) also be adopted.
Recommended procedures, which are necessarily somewhat complicated, are
those contained in DIAM 65-3-1. As to coordinates, the Team recommends
the use of the "Point Reference Guide" PC-560/1-64, with the use of graphic
references from which the coordinates are derived,
3. The Final Report, together with the tabs mentioned therein,
provides details of the many conclusions reached by the Task Team with
respect to the four elements mentioned and contains a discussion also of
a. country code system.
4. On one point and one point alone, the Task Team was unable to
reach unanimous agreement prior to submission of its Interim Report and
this concerned the naming of missile sites. Subsequent to the submission
of the Interim Report, due to the activities of the Task Team and the
active participation of representatives of the Defense Intelligence Agency,
the National Photographic Interpretation Center, and appropriate elements
of the Central Intelligence Agency, this matter was resolved to the satis-
faction of all concerned. This was made possible by DIA's adoption of the
NPIC system for naming of research and development missile sites and the
adoption by CIA/NPIC of DIA's naming procedures for operational missile
sites. This solution represents the initial fruits of the operation of
Task Team IV.
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved F lelease 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00WR001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
DISCUSSION
1. The objective of the task assigned to this Task Team is:
"To develop a uniform format(s) for the identification
of physical installations and geographic features of
intelligence interest to facilitate the processing and
exchange of intelligence information and documents
thereon." (Contained in Terms of Reference approved
by CODIB on 9 December 1964 as stated in communication
from CODIB dated 26 December, CODIB-D-111/1.4/1).
2. An examination has been made by the Task Team into the various
formats in use within the Intelligence Community for the description and
identification of installations and geographic features. This exami-
nation revealed, in some instances, between one hundred and two hundred
descriptive factors used for a single installation/geographic feature.
A case in point is "Landing Beaches," for which 140 individual descrip-
tive factors may be included for a single landing beach. The examina-
tion of formats used for various categories of installations indicated
clearly that some of the factors used are entirely identificatory;
others are completely descriptive; and some are both identificatory and
descriptive. At the other extreme, one completely automated system
requires but two items for positive identification:
a. An identification number for the installation;
b. A coded category number expressing the function of
the installation.
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved Fc6,Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00QVR001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
- 2 -
3, To this end, the Task Team has devoted a number of meetings in
exploration of the minimum number of elements required for positive .
identification of installations (or geographic features) of intelligence
interest, of universal applicability regardless of the type of category
of installation, i.e., applicable to both Port Facilities and Biological
Warfare Research Institutes, to both Submarine Force Headquarters and
Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Launch Sites, to both Ammunition
Depots and Wet Cell Storage Battery Production Facilities, etc.
4. The Task Team has concluded that with the use of four factors
or elements, positive identification can be made of installations and/or
geographic features of intelligence interest; that these elements are
applicable to all types or categories of installations/geographic
features; that community-wide use of these elements will facilitate the
processing and exchange of intelligence information and documents thereon;
that these elements may be applied to all sources and systems of intelli-
gence interest; that these elements can be incorporated in a. format of
the characteristics desired for information processing, dissemination,
collection guidance and installation analysis; that these elements can
be used in a variety of information processing systems and that the four
elements selected also satisfy the need for inclusion in both machine-
structured and indexed narrative systems.
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 Approved Fb2elease 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00bWR001400090009-9
S-E-C-R-E-T
b. A designator of the category involved; in other words,
the functional classification of the installation or geographic
feature.
c. The name of the installation or geographic feature.
d. The coordinates of the location of the installation,
and the source from which derived.
Consideration was also given to an indicator for the country in which
the installation is located.
6. Agreement was reached fairly promptly and unanimously within the
Task Team on the factors listed above. Considerable time was devoted to
exploration of the advantages and disadvantages of the various alternatives
available in the Intelligence Community with respect to functional codes,
UTM or geographic coordinates, country codes, etc. Ultimately, agree-
ment was reached by the Task Team that the following be adopted by the
Intelligence Community for use in formats devoted to installations and
geographic features of intelligence interest:
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
 25X1 Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9
Next 58 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2005/12/24: CIA-RDP82M00097R001400090009-9