Documents / FOIA release

(EST Pub Date) the Office of Scientific Intelligence, 1949-68- (Volume Three, Annexes Viii, Ix, and X)

Central Intelligence Agency · 1972-06-01 · 243 pages · text by GLM-OCR

This is Volume Three of the CIA Directorate of Science and Technology Historical Series on the Office of Scientific Intelligence (OSI), 1949 to 1968, written by Karl H. Weber in June 1972 and approved for release in 2008. It holds three annexes, on OSI publications, OSI's external assistance and contracting program, and OSI's interaction with the National Security Agency. The released text covers production planning, review boards, current intelligence periodicals and future threat forecasting. It does not discuss UFOs.

  • p. 64 …Until 1961 when the Agency moved into the Headquarters Building, OSI and OCI were so separated…
  • p. 142 …Government maintains large organizations, especially those with headquarters in Washington, it has been possible to obtain…
  • p. 180 for approval by him and to higher headquarters The principles developed during the 1955/56 period…

Read from the scan by GLM-OCR; expect the odd misread word.

# Coordination and Review Procedures

The Brief and its predecessors have always been fully coordinated within the Agency. As far as can be determined, they have never been coordinated outside of CIA. Early SIMs were coordinated by the OSI Intelligence Board in regular session but could be and normally were coordinated by the IB members without a formal Board session. In addition they were generally coordinated with the Office of Current Intelligence and the Office of Research and Reports (now OER). The more recent Briefs have been coordinated with the appropriate OSI divisions and other appropriate CIA Offices as determined by their content. Because of time restrictions, they are not normally reviewed by the Intelligence Board. Intelligence Board members, however, have always had the option of calling Board meetings on the Brief and have done so in one or two cases when a paper was particularly controversial. The lack of IB review has both advantages and disadvantages. It tends to slow the publication but at the same time frequently results in a casual review of the material presented. Further, the lack of IB review normally makes it more difficult for the author and the reviewer to meet and discuss any problems in the paper.

TOP SECRET

Not linked to a story yet.

About this file

FOIA release, from the cia-readingroom collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. The text was read from the page images by GLM-OCR; expect the odd misread word. 243 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.