IN
4611 k@1@1,61&!DP96-00788 ROO 170028001 U-
Approved For Release 2QP'ji
IACG
SUBJECT: GRILL FLAME Program (U)
MG E. R. Thompson
Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence
HQDA
Washington, DC 20310
1. (U) References:
15 August 1980
a. (U) DIA Ltr S-1922/DT-1, 7 Aug 80, subject as above. (SECRET)
b. (U) Report of the GRILL FLAME Scientific Evaluation Committee,
Dec 79. (SECRET)
2. (U) Forwarded for your information at inclosure 1 are specific
comments pertaining to a review of ref a proposal. Although the DIA
initiative in this area is a well intentioned and long awaited one,
there are several general areas of concern cited below to which your
attention is invited.
3. (S/NOFORN) Whereas ref a justification for sole source procurement
with SRI International may apply in the area of remote viewing technol-
ogy, such justification is invalid in areas of "tracking" and
physiological monitoring. So far as is known, SRI has no substantial
data base regarding either "tracking" experiments or physiological
monitoring. It would appear other possible contractors should be
considered, some of whom may be more technically suited to accomplish
these goals.
4. (S/NOFORN) The question of source of Army fnnding is one which must
be resolved. The INSCOM GRILL FLAME Program (IGFP) operating budget
for FY 81-83 stands at $150K per year; however, the IGFP will be
evaluated in July 1981 to determine program viability. It is premature
under these circum tances for IGFP to be contractually committed to any
three year program. It is not, however, premature for Army to so
commit funds. Of FY 81 funds, approximately $30K is to be dedicated
CLASSIFIED 13YO& '0@@
GRILLFLAME DECLASSIFY 06
Approved For Release 2003/09/16 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO170028001SL8
REVIEW. ON
SECIR T NGFURI _A*2;@@
Approved For Release 2003/09/l6F4f~UZ'TRBBS9'11788ROO1700280016-8
IACG (15 Aug 80)
SUBJ: GRILL FLAME Program (13)
toward IGFP operations. Although the remaining funds are expecteA to
be directed toward contractual training, by no means can IGFP allow
those funds to beccommitted to SRI in their entirety. The IGFP must
retain a high level of initiative in pursuing training/development
required by remote viewing operations, and from whatever source these
benefits might be derived. Under these circumstances, it is apparent
that DA funding assistance for FY 81 and follow-on years will be
required if ref a proposal is accepted.
5. (S/NOFORN) Ref a proposes training of two Army personnel in ORV
techniques and one in "tracking" during FY 81. However, an associate
of SRI having proprietary interest in development of the new ORV methods
does not anticipate readiness for training for approximately one year.
In view of lack of prior SRI involvement in formal "tracking" experi-
ments, it is unlikely that a training procedure could be developed and
training accomplished during FY 81. Under this proposed DIR concept,
little substantive gain will be realized by Army during FY 81 with the
single exception of the audio analysis portion.
6. (SINOFORN) In view of ref b recommendations concerning cessation of
contact with SRI, there appears to be a basic contradiction in the
ref a proposal which may have already been considered by your o4fice.
Essentially, ref a proposes a long term period of association with SRI,
and at an expanded level. Whereas INSCOM is of the position that
continued contact with SRI is warranted, that contact should not be at
the expense of pursuing other potential sources of training/information
in the psychoenergetics field.
1 Incl
as
WILLIAM I. ROLYA
Major General, USA
Commanding
2
Approved F4W&UJa'L'1P0RNfO9/16 CIA-RDP96-00788 ROO 1700280016-8
WV
Approved For Release 20
.@6CIP!RMP9W0788RO01 700280016-8
IAFM-OPS-HU-SA
14 August 1980
SUBJECT: INSCOM Comments to Proposed DIA Memorandum of Understanding re.
GRILL FLAME Program.
1. (U) Reference: DIA Lettert S-1922/DT-1, 7 August 1980, subject: GRILL
FLAME Program.
2. (S/NOFORN) Comments re. basic letter.
a. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph 2: It is INSCOM's understanding at this time there
is little liklihood SRI will be prepared to administer "new" training technique
during FY 81. SRI has done little formal experimentation in "tracking" and is
ill equipped to examine physiological functioning. SRI, at the present time, can-
not comply with "full year's effort" regarding some aspects of Statement of Work.
b. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph 2: INSCOM funds are limited and are directed
toward sustaining an intelligence operational evaluation of psychoenergetics.
INSCOM cannot MIPR funds to DIA without knowing individual costs of those ele-
ments of the program that are in support of INSCOM needs, and without knowing
which elements SRI can realistically fulfill during FY 81.
c. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph 3: Nonconcur that entire first year effort
should be at SRI. In areas of tracking and physiological monitoring, SRI offers
no meaningful advantage, particularly during critical first year. INSCOM funds
are intended to be employed where they can best benefit INSCOM's evaluation
effort, regardless of source of external support being sought.
d. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph 5: A meeting of Action Officers was scheduled
for 11 Aug 60. IGFP was never notified of such intent.
3. (S/NOFORN) Comments re. Mission and Objectives Statement.
a. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph la: Functions related to development of a US ORV
capability have been placed behind the overall objective of threat assessment.
Elsewhere in proposal, threat is antecedent to development of a US capability.
Recommend para la become para lh, and objectives pertaining to development
of a US capability be moved forward in priority.
b. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph le: Recommendations re. GRILL FLAME Program
should be last objective in series. Recommend para le become para li.
c. (S/NOFORN) Paragraphs lh and lj: Recommend combining these objectives
in para Ig,-as they are similar and must occur prior to final recommendation
and threat assessment functions.
d. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph ;Lb: Milestones for year #2 mention establishment
of a cadre of fully trained ORVs, but does not address prospect of other non-
SRI sponsored training. Exploration of alternative possibilities Must be a
year #1 function, and a continuous process throughout follow on years. It is
presumptuous to assume SRI has all there is to offer and that SRI training is
the only prerequisite to achieving "full qualification." Such pursuit of
qualification must be a continuous and dynamic process, not limited to sole source
procurement of training and development services at SRI. INSCOM recommends
3 -Y11>, 051436@
s
Approved For Release 200SE6 L96100788RO01 700280016-8
Incl 1 A W, @ZDC"o
Approved For Release 20041eq/o-&:@! Rbf9W-j6788R`001 700280016-8
IAFM-OPS-HU-SA 14 August 1980
SUBJECT: INSCOM Comments to Proposed DIA Memorandum of Understanding
re. GRILL FLAME (U)
term "fully trained" be deleted. The term "cadro" is vague. Recommend a mini-
mum level of personnel be cited to lend substance to this milestone.
e. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph 2c: Milestones for year #3 include "apply all ORV
1, @,vr personnel to real intelligence programs". Who will provide these personnel? Who
V,@will coordinate collection priorities and tasking of ORV groups? Are such per-
5
,4% , they to include those
I sonnel to be trained only in new SRI methodologies or are
V F,
V previously trained? What is proposed f;aturatlon rate of tasking to be levied
)i-yli"' by DIA? Will Mil'itary Services lose control of their assets during this and
154@ AJ the preceding year #2 data acquisition effor.t?
V11 lf@@
0 f. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph 2c: If Military Service ORV personnel are to par-
ticipate in "real intelligence" collection activities from year #2 onward, it
would appear the milestone "training programs for ORV monitors... 11 is more ap-
propriately a year #1 or year #2 milestone. Otherwise, data acquired during
year #2 and year #3 upon which final evaluations/judgements are based, will be
data provided by "trained" ORV personnel functioning Linder the guidance of
fluntrained" monitor personnel.
g. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph 3: All experimental/testing design, reports of
progress and experiment results should be cleared by joint approval of Action
Officers at the GRILL FLAME Committee level, not the COTR. COTR ShOUld moniLor
day to day activity of SRI, but not have the authority to unilaterally approve/
disapprove basic initiatives or interpret results. [his procedure would be in
more direct compliance with responsibilities of the COTR outlined in the pro-
posed MOU.
h. (S/NOFORN) Comment Overview: As far as INSCOM.is concerned, the object-
ives and milestones as proposed by DIA represent a step backward. The IGFP has
been training personnel for two years, has been working on real-intelligence
operational tasks for nearly one year, and has been examining "variables" impact-
ing on ORV collection for nearly two years. IGFP has directed considerable
effort toward determining guidelines for "best use" of ORV since its inception,
and currently has a data base of over 500 ORV sessions of both training and
operational categories. SRI was tasked during an earlier contractual agreement
to develop a meaningful selection criterion (ORV profile) and essentially was
capable of providing little which was not already known and already utilized by
the IGFP in its early stages of development (refer report entitled "Special
Orientation Techniques", SRI, June 1980)
4. (SAOFORN) Comments re.*Memorandum of Understanding.
a. (S/NOFORN) Unnumbered introductory paragraph 1; In this paragraph, deter-
mination of hostile ORV threat is placed antecedent to the goal of determining
whether a useful ORV capability can be developed. This ordering of objectives
supports rationale cited in paragraph 3a above.
b. (S/NOFORN) 'Unnumbered introductory paragraph 2- Recommend this para-
graph be included in introductroy paragraph 1, with wording as follows:
Approved For Release 206C6.1 bP9t-00788R001 700280016-8
t"tIA-RbP9
Approved For Release 2003109V,1@ -00188R001 7002800165-8
IAFM-OPS-HU-SA 14 August 1980
SUBJECT: INSCOM Comments to Proposed DIA Memorandum of Understanding
re. GRILL FLAME (U)
"...SRI International. The GRILL FLAME Committee will seek
throughout the first year, and continually during follow-on
years, to examine capabilities developed by potential contractors
other than SRI. DIA and the Military Services will maintain
"state of the art" continuity with psychoenergetics research
within the US with a view toward diversification of external
assistance support if, and when, required by operational needs
of participating agencies/services."
C. (5/NOFORN) Paragraph b: Recommend addition of function:
jo 1@ -) "(4) Maintain continuity with state of the art developments
in ps'ychoenergetics research in the US and elsewhere to ident-
ify alternative training opportunities."
d. (SAOFORN) Paragraph b: Recommend addition of following function if
comments of paragraph 3d, 3e, and 3f above apply:
"(5) Provide ORV (and/or) ORV monitor personnel support to
SRI experiments as required during years #2 and 0."
e. (SAOFORN) Paragraph c: If comments contained in parn 3e above apply,
recommend addition of the following task:
11(8) Establish intelligence collection priorities for ap-
plication of ORV technique to real targets (commencing in
year #2), insuring that the intelligence needs of each
participating service are met."
f. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph d: If comments conained in para 3e above apply,
recommend addition of following task:
"(9) Provides verbatim transcripts of all experimental
ORV sessions directed against real intelligence targets to:
(a) The GRILL FLAME Committee, and
(b) the participating Military Service against
whose EEI or intelligence "gap" the session was
directed, and
(c) the participating Military Service whose
ORV personnel was employed."
g. (SAOFORN) Paragraph d: Responsibilities of the COTR listed here do
not agree with statements contained in Mission and Objectives SLatement, para 3
(refer to INSCOM Comment, para 3g above).. INSCOM concurs with duties outlined
3
Approved For Release 2003'6' 6-0@788ROO1700280016-8
:-@ @11- t kt- I
Approved For Release 2o&E G-REr 0788ROO1700280016-8
IAFM-OPS-HU-SA 14 August 1980
SUB3ECT: INSCOM Comments to Proposed DIA Memorandum of Understanding
re. GRILL FLAME (U)
in MOU with single exception that the GRILL FLAME Committee should be respon-
sive to inquiries from other services/agencies, vice the COTR as stated in
para d(O)p MOU.
5. (S/NOFORN) Comments re. Statement of Work.
a. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph 2.1: Army already has trained ORVs. Is pro-
posed training to be in "new" SRI technique? If so, indications are the "new"
technique will not be ready for another year. SRI therefore will probably be
unable to achieve FY 81 training goal. Refer comments para 2a above. If
training in'"old" SRI technique is intended, it appears Army funding commit-
mentshould be reduced, since training of that type during FY 79 was signifi-
cantly less manpower intensive for SRI than the "new" technique appears.
b. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph 2.2: A valid Army requirement for SRI to pursue.
However, what is independent cost f igure? If training of 2 ORVs in "old" tech-
nique and audio analysis are intended during year #1, Army funding contribution
should be adjusted downward.
V, c. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph 2.3: Refer to comment para 2a above. Again, no
PSA formal training program exists. It is unlikely SRI could honor such a year #1
commitment with a quality program. Other contractor possibilities should be
explored. Recommend Army contact USMC regarding Vietnam era employment of
acking. Recommend that FY 81 task
dowsers, a function apparently related to tr@
be to develop a formal training program, and that training of Army personnel be
moved to FY 82.
d. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph 2.4: SRI expertise does not appear to include
physiological monitoring capability. Recommend consideration be given to
diversifying contractor support by examining expertise of other organizations.
The Maimonides Institute and the Meninger Foundation have made significant
inroads into this area. The technical expertise of such organizations far out-
weigh that available at SRI, insofar as bio-physical evaluation is concerned.
e. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph 2.8: Quick reaction tasks should be avoided
whenever possible. Not only do they detract from the effort at hand and lead
to numerous scheduling and production problems, but more importantly, there is
a great security risk in involving uncleared personnel in sensitive intelli-
gence situations.
f. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph 6: Security Requirements. Sufficient SI/SAO
billets should be identified to properly support the program. If and when
SRI-I commences work on operational situations, then it would be wise if all
personnel connected with operational matters possess the necessary clearances.
g. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph 7: Monthly Status Report. Not needed. The COTR
is there to insure that work is flowing smoothly and the quarterly technical
reports should be sufficient to enable everyone to keep abreast of currQnt
developments.
Approved For Release 2003/ tt@-Ot788RO01 700280016-8
01700280016-8
Approved For Release 2003/094D MAkR
,JDRE7TRo
IAFM-OPS-HU-SA 14 August 1980
SUBJECT: INSCOM Comments to Proposed DIA Memorandum of Understanding
re. GRILL FLAME (U)
h. (S/NOFORN) Paragraph 8: Suggest more appropriate term than "interpret".
The contract monitor should not try to "interpret" anyone's request but rather
take 'requirements as stated to contractor and then serve as interface between
contractor and primary customer if clarification is needed.
6. (S/NOFORN) Comments re. Miscellaneous Items.
a. INSCOM is not prepared to enter into 36 months effort with SRI-I. Is DA?
b. (S/NOFORN) Monthly Status Report: Again, this step is not needed.
SRI-I staff personnel will be spending all their time and efforts in generating
reports instead of concentrating on the job at hand.
7. (S/NOFORN) Comments re. Funding.
a. (S/NOFORN) Contract should be for 1 year - renewable if results so
justify.
- b. (S/NDFORN) It is not clear where the money is coming from to fund the
levels indicated. Is DA gbing to provide $150K for the Army portion of the
$450.0 IGFP funds are directed toward INSCOM evaluation project.
8. (S/NOFORN) Comments re. MIPR Control Provisions and Guidance. Ref item 4:
Changes in purpose scope or desired results, etc. must be approved by the GRILL
FLAME Committee vice the Primary Contractor Monitor. Refer comment paras 3g and
4g above.
5
r% r
Approved For Release 200S ;I-R[[_;6J0788RO01 700280016-8
r