Intelligence Community Reorganization: Potential Effects on DOD Intelligence Agencies

Publication Date: December 2004

Publisher: Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Author(s):

Research Area: Military and defense

Type:

Abstract:

Although the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is the best known member of the Intelligence Community, the bulk of the nation's intelligence effort is undertaken by the intelligence agencies of the Department of Defense (DOD). In particular, the National Security Agency (NSA), the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) (formerly known as the National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA)) are major collectors of information for DOD and non-DOD consumers and absorb a large percentage of the annual intelligence budget. (The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), albeit a large and important component of the Intelligence Community, is more directly focused on DOD requirements.)

Some Members of Congress and independent commissions, most recently the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, the 9/11 Commission, have argued that a lack of coordination among intelligence agencies contributed to the failure to provide warning of the terrorist attacks of September 2001. In response, in December 2004 Congress passed intelligence reform legislation (P.L. 108-458) that modifies the existing organization of the Intelligence Community and establishes more centralized leadership under a newly created Director of National Intelligence (DNI).

As the legislation was being debated in the fall of 2004, attention focused on the extent of the budgetary and administrative authorities to be assigned to the DNI. Significant concerns were expressed by DOD officials, some Members of Congress, and various outside observers that providing the DNI with greater authority and control of intelligence agencies in DOD could jeopardize the increasingly close relationship between these agencies and the operating military forces.

The conference committee on intelligence reform legislation (S. 2845) addressed these concerns with language that gave the DNI substantial authorities over intelligence budgets, but not operational control over their activities. The final version of the legislation also provided that the details of budgetary authorities to be exercised by the DNI and other cabinet officers be worked out in accordance with guidelines to be issued by the President after the DNI is appointed.

This report will be updated as circumstances warrant.