CIA-RDP96-00788R001500090028-8

SECRET
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA RDP96-00788R001500090028-8
IAGPA-F-SD
27 Nov 84
MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
SUBJECT:
CENTER LANE Discussion with INSCOM Command Group -
20-21 Nov 84
(U)
1.
(S/CL-2/NOFORN)
On 19
November 1984, I
requested an
appointment with the Chief of Staff to discuss CENTER LANE (CL)
developments after a series of meetings at DIA earlier that
day. My primary objective was to notify the INSCOM Command
Group that the CL transfer to DIA most likely would not occur
before 31 December 1984, and that DIA planned to request a
detailing of INSCOM personnel rather than a PCS.
2.
(S/CL-2/NOFORN)
On 20 November 1984, from 1100-1140 hours,
I met with COL Kirk and LTC Johnson to inform them of recent CL
developments and covered the following topics.
SG1J
a.
(S/CL-2/NOFORN) A summary of my meetings at DIA on 19
November 1984, and the fact that DIA had a copy of the ACSI
4
October 1984 letter to the CG, INSCOM that authorized detailing
if desired. Either LTG Williams or
would call the
CG with that request.
A copy of the outcome those meetings is
attached as Incl 1.
b. (S/CL02/NOFORN)
The CL transfer to DIA would not take
place by 31 December 1984 as planned because of a need for DIA
to notify Congress of the action. There simply
was not enough
time to accomplish the letter writing campaign.
Additionally, I
provided an explanation as to why the transfer
would not be
accomplished on time.
WARNING NOTICE:
CENTER LANE SPECIAL ACCESS PROGRAM
RESTRICT DISSEMINATION TO THOSE WITH VERIFIED ACCESS
TO CATEGORY TWO
(2)
SENSITIVE INTELLIGENCE SOURCES AND METHODS INVOLVED
NOT RELEASABLE TO FOREIGN NATIONALS
CLASSIFIED BY:
CDR,
INSCOM
DECLASSIFY ON:
OADR
COPY
1
OF
1
COPIES
Approved For Release 2000 ( PDF 96-00788R001500090028-8

.
-
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 :[Q RUP96-00788R001500090028-8
c. (S/CL-2/NOFORN)
Detailing of CL assets to DIA would
work, although it would not meet the CG's objectives of "getting
INSCOM out the the business."
I stated
that
I did not
understand the CG's concerns about "something" going wrong, " but
I tried to convey the thought that risk was minimal. During the
discussion on risk, I added that there would always be some risk
because of the Great Skill (GS) asset and a continued
association with ASD because of the DASR.
An additional risk
would be incurred because INSCOM would continue to be a CL
follow on "customer" and an association between an intelligence
agency and a psychoenergetic collection activity would carry
some risk.
COL Kirk accepted the problem, understood its complexity, and
determined it was time for me to brief MG Soyster on the
developments. An appointment was made for 211030 Nov 84.
It
was COL Kirk's position that he would approve the detailing, but
he was not sure of the CG's position. He stated he would alert
the CG as to the purpose of the meeting.
3. (S/CL-2/NOFORN)
On 21 November 1984 from 1050-1135 hours, I
met with MG Soyster to brief him on recent CL transfer
developments.
The basis of the discussion was the talking paper
at Incl 2.
I covered the following points.
SG1J
a.
(S/CL-2/NOFORN) DIA management had a copy of the ACSI 4
Oct 84 MOA approval letter, and they planned to move for a
detailing action rather than a PCS. LTG Williams or
would telephonically contact MG Soyster in the near future to
discuss the issue.
b.
(S/CL-2/NOFORN)
DIA
saw a
requirement
notify
Congress of the CL detailing/transfer.
The notification process
and return reply from Congress would not be completed by 31
December 1984, and the transfer/detailing could not take place
until the notification process had been completed. That could
delay the transfer until April 1985.
I provided the rationale
for the Congressional notification which MG Soyster acknowledged.
to
c.
(S/CL-2/NOFORN)
The pros and cons of detailing/PCSing
were presented.
I recommended the detailing option because it
protected the personnel better, and permitted the resumption of
the CL collection effort on a timely basis.
In support of my
recommendation, I downplayed the number of INSCOM spaces that
would have to be "gapped". CL has seven military spaces, one of
which is a GS officer. One officer is scheduled to PCS in June
85, so therefore there are only five spaces to be "gapped".
I
cleared up the misconception that INSCOM would have to provide a
replacement for the June 1985 loss. I stated that detailing
would mean indirect INSCOM involvement with psychoenergetics
until December 1985.
Approved For Release 2001/08/0
SECAR PF0078R001500090028-8

Approved For Release 200
SEGRET
A RDP96-00788R001500090028-8
d.
(S/CL-2/NOFORN)
If MG Soyster accepted the detailing
proposal, I would rewrite the MOA to protect INSCOM's interests
so that full responsibility for CL operations would rest with
DIA.
I further recommended that if he approves detailing that
he consider reaching an agreement to place CL in VO.
MG Soyster did not rule out detailing and said that if he did
not receive a call from DIA soon, he would call
for an update. He reiterated his position of support for the CL
technique .
However, he did not desire to "keep footing the
bill." MG Soyster directed the preparation of a letter that
would notify ACSI of the delay.
Brian Buzby
2
Incl
as
BRIAN BUZBY
LTC, MI
CENTER LANE Project Manager
SG1J
Approved For Release 2001/030
SECRET78
ICA-RD 96-00788R001500090028-8