Approved For Release 2003/05!
WJlUy?
FOREIGN NATIONALS
INFORMATION PAPER
DAMI-ISH
Sep
IUHJECT:
GRILL FLAME
(U)
PURPOSE
.
(S/NOFORN)
To inform ACSI
DA of
a potential
situation
with regard
tp (SHILL FLAME
and offer recommendations that will
prevent possible embarrassment
to the Army.
FACTS
.
(S/NOFORN)
BACKGROUND;
Tn rcSDonap
f n
r mfi
mj
•
.
_
SS
Th?r
aon ’
a
"2ri?oe GR?LL
FI AMEPM
rPC,Se
S
f the meetin» was to
appr'ove the Joint
and Objective-
statement'’"'’'
1'?" °f Undarstabding
(MOU)
,
Mission
J
Statement,
and proposed contract with SRI
(TAB C).
2.
(U)
DISCUSSION:
.
.
a
'
( S/NOFORN)
In order to ensure support of Army INSCOM'
.—^at Sab c1o
e[P
M
w
J,^y »"***»* P~p2.S Jrart"
*
rev^/co^n't.^Thls S u
££
wirn
i
mcl)
at
TAB
B.
Because LTC Watt was on leave
a representative from his organization,
LT Fred Atwater
wac3
’
invited to attend the
10 Aug' 80 meeting
at DM tfpresent ?nscom
c-
recommended changes
to the proposed draft
documents
AfteJ
meeting,
MAJ May asked
LT Atwater
if he
felt
LTC Watt
and
TNSC’OM
!•
r
U
!c
C?ncur w
J‘ th
the proposed changes made
at
the meeting
LT Atwater replied he thought they would.
g
'
m f.L
(
MAj°Hav
N
t:hat
A
h
™
”
A“8 80 •* h*
!l^
d
ropo°ed
C
SoS
U
(TAB
t
A)
t^,T- T HaV Snd LTC Watt
d”af™d
C°M
n
f?U
tTAB A)
whlch we Plan to table at
a proposed GRTIL
r LAME Committee meeting at DIA during the next meet?ng? Tate unknown.
are
as
INSC0"'* maJ ° r °b J ecti°"s
-nd MAJ Hay agrees,
(1)
(S/NOFORN)
INSCOM has $150K total
to
fund
th*»
pv
ri
CHILL FLAME effort.
INSCOM needs
S30K
to
fund the operational
effort.
This would leave S120K
for external contracts with whomever
VMS
(®)
•3 a<MiAMify
Classified by DIA-DT
Review
Sep 2000
Reason:
2- 301c.
)P96-db788F^(J0-iW0^fiff1(7-7
FOREIGN NATIONALS
Approved For Release 2003/09/16
:
A-RDP96-00788R001 70028001 7-7
»0T RELEASABLE TO
FOREIGN NATIONALS
LAMI-ISH
.SUBJECT
:
GRILL FLAME
(U)
it can be determined can meet INSCOM's requirements
at the least
possible cost
.
4-^^^.gp-~pCr^ onncl
±n ^
‘r1
i
h
L
. rat-ion.—and—f-oeus
.
'Cost
of—tTii*?" tr'jriming
iu
riut
ioi±-^u±TtnTTe:
(NOTE:
DIA proposal
states
$120K
from Army INSCOM
all
to be funded for
an
SRI
effort.
DIA maintains
that Army had
pi e Piously 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
.
)
.
.
.
r
. T
.
^ 2
?
(S/NOFORN)
DIA Made
a unilateral decision to send
die DTA primary contract monitor
to SRI
,
Menlo Park,
CA on Thursday
.
.
Lst
or Friday 22d of August.
This was done prior to the MOU being
approved by Director,
DIA;
Army,
and Air Force ACSIs.
NOTE*
DIA
n°, onf Ejected to the primary contract monitor going’ to the
mi^ntto^to^hv^ica^lv
1^?"10
!
13 '^
•
ob
j
!*^ ln9 to the need
for the contact
i.u.m tor to phy-ical Ly
locate himself at
SRI
for the followina
reasons;
WAUy
r
....
Jf
( S/NOFORN )
If the GRILL FLAME Committee
is
in
tut
joint,
the DIA has no right
to make
a unilateral decision such
,V-% i'sVundinn"-^
to
, the MOU being signed.
NOTE:
DIA feels since
Vy\
,
.
f
JJ
d
ng
°alyer
s move
xt
is no one else's problem.
We
feel
l a
>
?To
1 ‘C31 °n
,
S
c rit±zed
»
DIA
*
Army,
and Air Force will
jointly
held
i esponsible since we
are
a joint committee.
.
,
(S/NOFORN)
If the primary contract monitor
is
oeated on the West Coast with
SRI,
we question how he can best
monitor
all
additional contract efforts elsewhere.
NOTE
DIA
“ »rSw„i
S
b~* quall
fied *" this project they will Z,
a Hi probably continue to receive most of the contracts,
therefore
l
. makes sense to maintain the contract monitor
at that
location.
'
> SRI
total
i v^rii
(S/NOFORN)
The move of the primary contract monitor
:
' e’ Arrav CRIH
FI amp^?
^
r ^Dmmendation of the Department of
..i.
Army
tiuLI,
H.,AMh Scientific Evaluation Committee Renort
-ccmber 79
page
10,
para
3b.
"Dependence on the
SR
saould be phased out."
NOTE:
DIA feels
the Gale Reoort^s biased
and GRILL FLAME
was doomed before
it started,
therefore
no one
is
ie
tS
• rec^endatl °nS
(esPeciaily when we
* are using
• ogram
III
funds vice Program VI.
^
DP9^q7p&pp0i7^8^1 7-7
FOREIGN NATIONALS
SGI J
SGI J
Approved For Release 2002tfg
DAMI-ISH
SUBJECT:
GRILL FLAME
(U)
)
!
-i
til
til
G
iJ
ft
oo
of
Bo
be
.'in
SR
(d)
(S/NOFORN)
The move of the contract
I potentially decreases the operational
security of
Puthoff and Russ Targ are well known
as so-called
e PSI
area.
To move
a DIA contract monitor to work
em makes
it difficult
to deny
POD interest
in PSI.
pears DIA believes both LTC Watt
and
MA.J
Stoner
r
Dr.
Verona's office,
spec if i rall y
jections
are directed
at
parochialism,
MAJ Hay
d oes not
LTC Wat tV and MAJ Stoner
monitor
to
the project,
experts
in
closely with
NOTE:
It
"have
it
in"
,
and
all
of these
At'
cue
risk of being accused
Relieve this
to be the case.
l.
.
\
y — **'-*
believe that Salyer from the
yfery
gunning^ constructed iiimsel f
a position
at
SRI
for personal
gains,
d| that he skillful lfy sold the
idea that he /should be
tty£
"man"
at
U/V3
S^rC.lj
4^ TX \/o^4/ A-
(U)
IMPACT:
a.
(S/NOFORN)
If our proposed draft MOU
is
approved,
INSCOM
ill
likely fund $70K for contracts with
SRI.
SRI
initially felt
uat
it would be necessary to fund $500K to maintain
an adequate
rogram m PSI
but reduced that
figure to $45QK.
That figure was
urther reduced to $390K for FY
81 by the GRILL FLAME Committee.
. cording
t.o DIA,
this will cause
SRI
to reduce the number of per-
nnel
working
the project.
If Army INSCOM further reduces the
oiJar figure
SRI may pull
out of the program.
DIA firmly
el 3 eves
SRI
as configured with current personnel,
is
a national
'set:
‘
MA ’-
Ha -/ thinks that
is stretching things
a bit
far,
but
ook believe
SRI
efforts should continue
if they can produce
DOI)
an
r i
°ther COntractor
at the least possible
ost to
DOI).
If
SRI
did pull
out,
DIA'S primary contract monitor
I
l
ould be
left
on the West Coast to monitor nothing
,
fi nossibly causing
ie contract monitor to bring civil
suit against ]*$*for creating
J ami ly hardships,
loss of funds,
etc.
This would cause an embarrass
;ng situation for LTG Tighe and
Dr.
Verona.
Although Army and Air
,.
c rce
fre
r
.
1C>t formally
a part
of the Joint Services GRILL FLAME
•
nO'Signed MOU)
we have been very informally involved
ace
1978.
This could cause
some embarrassment to Army/Air Force.
remain^
If SIU
Kdoes not
"Pul 1
<>ut"
and
the DIA monitor
r het
;.i
her?.7,be
at
a later date some question dealing
'
objections listed m paragraph
2 (a) (b) (c
)
(d)
above.
odd!
t. lonally
,
there
is the potential
for questions to arise deal inn
"?»m‘£?£r7
afl
}
Ct f interest -
o^her contractors quSsSon
..**1 her ^contracfcors°wi thout^blaa?*'
l0Cat0d at SRI °«erin9 wor
'k to
Approved For Release 2003/09/1 (
I788R001 70028001 7-7
not releasable to
foreign nationals
DAMI-ISH
SUBJECT:
CHILL FLAME
(U)
(U)
CONCLUSION:
"mcjcam
. <S/NOFORN)
Dr.
Verona
is
angry because he believes Army
jNSCOM
is backing out of
its commitment of $120K.
His main concern
appears to be the
loss of the $120K from Army to
go iith £he SR?
program for FY
8!.
He
feels strongly SRI will pull oit if Army
reduces
the $120K further.
y
,
„
. b
'
(S/NOFORN)
The changing of the proposed MOU does not appear
to bother Dr.
Verona,
except he does not
feel,
as program manage?
he has to clear through the GRILL FLAME Committee before talking
with Congress or anyone else about the program.
asking
OPTIONS
(S/NOFORN)
Army withdraw from the Joint Service Program,
Advantages
Disadvantages
(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
i s now operating-,
t
^
drn
riS
it
Adv-antiiaes
Disadvantages
(]
)
Most cost effective
(1)
Army cannot spend money where
they
feel
it can obtain best
results,
iraan*??d
a
(at
t
?n??tbetter
raa'?‘>ged/
< 2 >
DIA makes unilateral decisions
yan.aed
(at least on paper).
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
Release 2003/09/16/ CIA-RDP96-OO788Ri0f7B(M<M1\7i71.
: TO
"'U |M
IT
roREaa mtiohals
-
'
rO)(f flnmdr
II
Approved For Release 2003/09/16
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 70028001 7-7
NOT RELEASABLE TO
FOREIGN nationals
DAMI-ISH
SUBJECT:
GRILL FLAME
(U)
n.odl?ied
(
N
?o?i
n
ows:
Army remain in the Joint Service Program but
)
(5/NOFORN)
As stated
in our proposed MOU
(TAB A).
decision^ for sending”the primary
e
contract°
bjeC
^
t0 DI?’ S
unilater, a.l
listed
in paragraph 2a ,b,c,d.
monitor to SRI
for reasons
DM
to
ensire
(
|("oK
j"]nt
A^^Me
1*S2L"VS year funds to *° to
Advantages
A.
(f>)
Keeps the Joint Service
(*)
Program alive
at
least
for one
the
year.
llt
(h)
Should be more cost effective.
(')
should be better managed/
organized.
rffor^
014 ^^
-b'd na te duplication of
r r\ ,r
h°Ul
f provide better exchange
oi
information.
M
(1)
Should eliminate unilateral
decisions by DIA
trainfn^t? allow
( Army 1WSCOM to obtain
J laming f t om contractors other
than
^
Should allow advance RV training
<a>d other beneficial
training for
INSOOM with the
SRI team
{
)
Prevent possible outside DOD
Verona
aSSment
for
L,TG Ti 9he and Dr.
j
Disadvantages
(a)
Could anger DIA and cause
tnem some embarrassment
. t ifiKlL'WBTtf*^
2003,c
,bFfk-00788R06i^08f'M(AmZLE TO
u
FOREIGN NATIONALS