Approved For Release 20U "DP96-00788RO01 200020017-0
IACG
Washington, DC 20310
SUBJECT: GRILL FLAME Program (U)
MG E. R. Thompson
Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence
HQDA
1. (U) References:
a. (U) DIA Ltr S-1922/DT-1, 7 Aug 80, subject as above. (SECRET)
b. (U) Report of the GRILL FLA-ME Scientific Evaluation Co=ittee,
Dec 79. (SECRET)
2. (U) Forwarded for your information at inclosure I 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/NOFGRN) 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 funding 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
*valuated in July 1981 to determine program viability. It is premature
under these circumstances 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 in to be dedicated
GRILLFLAME
=&%4fffDN0FG,RN
15 August 1980
                          FV
CLASSIFIED E3ya
DECLPSSIFY ON
         OR
REVIEW ON
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1200020017-0

  -Approved For Release 2000IM", *WQ$96-0078%RO01200020017-0
  TACG (15 Aug 80)
  SUBJ: GRILL FLAME Program (U)
  toward IGFP operations. Although the remaining funds are expectat 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 $1. Under this proposed DIN concept,
  little substantive gain will be realized by Army during FY 81 with the
  single exception of the audio analysis portion.
  6. (S/NOFORN) 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 psychoeuergetics field.
  1 Incl
  as
  WILLIAM I. ROLYA
  Major General, USA
  Co==nding
  2
  "6Q~_-F8RN
  Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1200020017-0