CIA-RDP96-00788R001700280017-7

Approved For Release 2003/09/16/6MFRDP96-00788R001790280017-7
SECRET
FOREIGN NATIONALS
INFORMATION PAPER
DAMI-ISH
12 Sep 80
SUBJECT :
GRILL FLAME (U)
PURPOSE .
(S/NOFORN)
To inform ACSI DA of a potential situation
with regard to GRILL FLAME and offer recommendations that will
prevent possible embarrassment to the Army.
FACTS.
1.
£
( S/NOFORN)
BACKGROUND:
In response to LTG Tighe's 7 Aug 80
letter to MG Thompson, a GRILL FLAME Committee meeting was held
on 18 Aug 80. The purpose of the meeting was to approve the Joint
Service GRILL FLAME Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), Mission
and Objectives Statement, and proposed contract with SRI (TAB C) .
2.
(U)
DISCUSSION :
a.
( S/NOFORN)
In order to ensure support of Army INSCOM's
interest in this matter, MAJ Hay provided the proposed draft
documents at TAB C to LTC Watt's organization at Fort Meade for
review and comment. This resulted in a response from MG Rolya
( letter with 1 Incl) at TAB B.
Because LTC Watt was on leave,
a representative from his organization, LT Fred Atwater, was
invited to attend the 18 Aug 80 meeting at DIA to present INSCOM's
recommended changes to the proposed draft documents. After the
meeting, MAJ Hay asked LT Atwater if he felt LTC Watt and INSCOM
could concur with the proposed changes made at the meeting.
LT Atwater replied he thought they would.
b.
(S/NOFORN )
MAJ Hay met with LTC Watt on 27 Aug 80 and he
informed MAJ Hay that he disagreed with LT Atwater and he and INSCOM
could not concur with the MOU. MAJ Hay and LTC Watt then drafted
a proposed MOU (TAB A) which we plan to table at a proposed GRILL
FLAME Committee meeting at DIA during the next meeting, date unknown.
C.
( S/NOFORN )
INSCOM's major objections,
and MAJ Hay agrees,
are as follows:
(1)
(S/NOFORN )
INSCOM has $150K total to fund the FY 81
GRILL FLAME effort.
INSCOM needs $30K to fund the operational
effort.
This would leave $120K for external contracts with whomever
Classified by DIA-DT
Review 12 Sep 2000
Reason :
2-301c.3
1, TLAME (U)
Approved For Release 2003916- A-RDP96-0078R001700280017-7
U
FOREIGN NATIONALS

Approved For Release 2003/09/16 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001700280017-7
SECRET
NOT RELEASABLE TO
FOREIGN NATIONALS
LAMI-ISH
SUBJECT :
GRILL FLAME (U)
it can be determined can meet INSCOM's requirements at the least
possible cost.
INSCOM also desires to develop personnel in the
reas of concentration and focus. Cost of this training is not
Let available. (NOTE: DIA proposal states $120K from Army INSCOM
all to be funded for an SRI effort.
DIA maintains that Army had
previously agreed verbally to provide $150K, then $120K and now
possibly even less than $120K.
Both LTC Watt and MAJ Stoner
disagree and LTC Watt has a Memorandum for Record to back up
statement. )
.
(2) (S/NOFORN) DIA Made a unilateral decision to send
the DIA primary contract monitor to SRI, Menlo Park, CA on Thursday
21st or Friday 22d of August. This was done prior to the MOU being
approved by Director, DIA; Army, and Air Force ACSIS.
NOTE :
DIA
states no one objected to the primary contract monitor going to the
West Coast at the 18 Aug 80 meeting. Both LTC Watt and MAJ Stoner
have gone on record previously objecting to the need for the contract
monitor to physically locate himself at SRI for the following
reasons :
(a) (S/NOFORN)
If the GRILL FLAME Committee is in
fact joint, the DIA has no right to make a unilateral decision such
as they have prior to the MOU being signed. NOTE :
DIA feels since
D'A is funding Salyer's move it is no one else's problem.
We feel
if this decision is critized, DIA, Army, and Air Force will jointly
be held responsible since we are a joint committee.
(b)
(S/NOFORN) If the primary contract monitor is
located on the West Coast with SRI, we question how he can best
monitor all additional contract efforts elsewhere.
NOTE :
DIA
feels since SRI is best qualified in this project they will now,
aid probably continue to receive most of the contracts, therefore,
it makes sense to maintain the contract monitor at that location.
(c) (S/NOFORN) The move of the primary contract monitor
"o SRI totally disregards the recommendation of the Department of
The Army GRILL FLAME Scientific Evaluation Committee Report, dated
December 79, page 10, para 3b.
"Dependence on the SRI approach
should be phased out. "
NOTE :
DIA feels the Gale Report is biased
and GRILL FLAME was doomed before it started, therefore, no one is
going to accept its recommendations (especially when we are using
Program III funds vice Program VI.
2
MLAME (U)
d For Release 2003/09/16D GIA-RDP96-09788R001700280017-7
FOREIGN NATIONALS

·
Approved For Release 2002199/16: CIA-RDP96-0978
SECRET
FOREIGN NATIONALS
DAAMI-ISH
SUBJECT :
GRILL FLAME (U)
(d)
( S/NOFORN )
The move of the contract monitor to
SRI potentially decreases the operational security of the project.
Hal Puthoff and Russ Targ are well known as so-called experts in
the PSI area.
To move a DIA contract monitor to work closely with
them makes it difficult to deny DOD interest in PSI. NOTE: It
appears DIA believes both LTC Watt and MAJ Stoner "have it in"
for Dr. Verona's office, specifically
and all of these
SG1J
SG1J
objections are directed at
At the risk of being accused
of parochialism, MAJ Hay does not believe this to be the case.
Both LTC Watt and MAJ Stoner believe that Salyer from the very
beginning constructed himself a position at SRI for personal gains,
and that he skillfully sold the idea that he should be the "man" at
SRI.
has continuly MISRepresented frets to DRVORONA.
3.
(U)
IMPACT :
a.
(S/NOFORN )
If our proposed draft MOU is approved, INSCOM
will likely fund $70K for contracts with SRI.
SRI initially felt
that it would be necessary to fund $500K to maintain an adequate
program in PSI but reduced that figure to $450K. That figure was
further reduced to $390K for FY 81 by the GRILL FLAME Committee.
According to DIA, this will cause SRI to reduce the number of per-
sonnel working the project. If Army INSCOM further reduces the
dollar figure by $SOK, SRI may pull out of the program. DIA firmly
believes SRI, as configured with current personnel, is a national
asset. MAJ Hay thinks that is stretching things a bit far, but
does believe SRI efforts should continue if they can produce DOD
requirements better than any other contractor at the least possible
cost to DOD.
If SRI did pull out, DIA's primary contract monitor
would be left on the West Coast to monitor nothing, possibly causing
the contract monitor to bring civil suit against DOD for creating
family hardships, loss of funds, etc. This would cause an embarrass-
ing situation for LTG Tighe and Dr. Verona. Although Army and Air
Force are not formally a part of the Joint Services GRILL FLAME
Committee (no signed MOU) we have been very informally involved
since 1978. This could cause some embarrassment to Army/Air Force.
b.
(S/'NOFORN )
£
If SRI does not "pull out" and the DIA monitor
remains at SRI, there may be at a later date some question dealing
with the objections listed in paragraph 2(a) (b) (c) (d) above.
Additionally, there is the potential for questions to arise dealing
with possible conflict of interest, e.g., other contractors question
the DIA primary contract monitor located at SRI offering work to
other contractors without bias.
3
:
Approved For Release 2003/09/16 { CIA-RDP96-00788R00170628004710
:
NUTH NO GARRY
FOREIGN NATIONALS

Approved For Release 2003/09/16@CFA-RDP96-00788R001700280017-7
SECRET
NOT RELEASABLE TO
FOREIGN NATIONALS
DAMI-ISH
SUBJECT :
GRILL FLAME (U)
4. (U)
CONCLUSION :
a.
(S/NOFORN) Dr. Verona is angry because he believes Army
INSCOM is backing out of its commitment of $120K. His main concern
appears to be the loss of the $120K from Army to go with the SRI
program for FY 81. He feels strongly SRI will pull out if Army
reduces the $120K further.
b. (S/NOFORN) The changing of the proposed MOU does not appear
to bother Dr. Verona, except he does not feel, as program manager,
he has to clear through the GRILL FLAME Committee before talking
with Congress or anyone else about the program.
5. (U)
OPTIONS :
a.
(S/NOFORN )
Army withdraw from the Joint Service Program.
Advantages
(1) Freedom to spend Army money
when and where we desire.
(1) We get less for our money
as Joint Service contracts
provides benefits from DIA/USAF
programs, i.e., exchange of
information.
(2) Manage our program without
coordination/approval of DIA.
(2) Prevents duplication of
effort.
(3) If SRI as presently staffed
should be considered a very
valuable asset to Army, the
program would suffer if there
is no joint service contract.
b. (S/NOFORN) Army remain in the Joint Service Program as it
is now operating.
Proposed IN Theoriginal Mov.
Advantages
Disadvantages
(]) Most cost effective.
(1) Army cannot spend money where
they feel it can obtain best results.
(2) Appears to be better managed/
organized (at least on paper) .
(2) DIA makes unilateral decisions
without regard to service needs.
Decisions could prove not in best
interest of Army.
(3) Keeps the SRI effort going
as currently staffed which may or
may not provide DOD with long term
benefits
C. IL FLAME L
Approved For Release 2003/09/16/ CIA-RDP96-00788RU61755280617-7E TO
CAUSE MOLTA VO
CARRY
SFARFT
FOREIGN NATIONALS
Disadvantages

Approved For Release 2003/09/16 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001700280017-7
SECRET
NOT RELEASABLE TO
FOREIGN NATIONALS
DAMI-ISH
SUBJECT :
GRILL FLAME (U)
c.
( S/NOFORN )
Army remain in the Joint Service Program but
modified as follows :
(1)
( S/NOFORN)
As stated in our proposed MOU ( TAB A) .
(2)
( S/NOFORN) Go on record to object to DIA's unilateral
decision for sending the primary contract monitor to SRI for reasons
listed in paragraph 2a, b, c,d.
(3) (S/NOFORN)
Approve $50K end of year funds to go to
DIA to ensure $120K Joint Service Contract for FY 81 continues as
DIA believed or stated they believed Army had committed prior.
Advantages
Disadvantages
(a) Could anger DIA and cause
them some embarrassment.
a
(+)
Keeps the Joint Service
Program alive at least for one
year.
(b)
Should be more cost effective.
(c)
Should be better managed/
organized.
(d)
Should eliminate duplication of
effort.
(e)
Should provide better exchange
of information.
( f )
Should eliminate unilateral
decisions by DIA.
(a)
Should allow Army INSCOM to obtain
training from contractors other than
SRI .
Should allow advance RV training
and other beneficial training for
INSCOM with the SRI team.
(i )
Prevent possible outside DOD
embarrassment for LTG Tighe and Dr.
Verona.
5
COAL FLAME (0)
Approved For Release, 2003/09/16 GIATE
2003/09/16 CIA(REP96-00788R001706280017ABLE TO
FOREIGN NATIONALS
: J SE HOLTAS NO GATRY

Approved For Release 2003/09/46
SECRET
FOREIGN NATIONALS
DAMI -ISH
SUBJECT :
GRILL FLAME (U)
6.
(U)
RECOMMENDATION :
Option C; if DIA refuses, go with Option A.
MAJ Hay/50114
-
.
6
NOT RELCASABLE TO
pproved For Release 2003/09/16 |CIA-RDP96-00788R00170028001
PWATIONALS