104-10336-10024 a “e 5 Ww ‘ , ADMINISTRATIVE - INTERNAL USE ONLY TO: [sos N b ress FROM: J. Barry Harrelson oh DATE: 04/03/97 03:04:45 PM SUBJECT: [ Re: JFK Assassination inquiry; Lockheed J bee Thanks for the quick response on Lockheed. | passed the information to the ARRB staff; they will keep us informed. The fax of pages from Rich's book is on its way. What do you know of NPIC records? In December (?) 1963, NPIC was ask to analyze the Zapruder film of the Kennedy assassination. In May 1975, the Agency told the Rockefeller Commission that the Secret Service requested the analysis, was present during the test, and took the film. The ARRB staff has found in the sequestered collection what they believe is evidence that the Agency made three additional copies. Their question: who directed the copying of the film and what happen to the copies? Do you know who has NPIC's 1963 records or how to go about searching this topic? Ce: b DST, Bonnie Hunter ADMINISTRATIVE - INTERNAL USE ONLY
13-00000 a oe CIA SP SIAL COTY 7 | VHASEIN FULL og Co ” 2000 Lo AER SiR NE renal SE OLY i H i 20 May 1976 MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD SUBJECT: Richard Sullins Co (Request #F 76-299) Coordination on FBI Release to” 1, There are a series of memoranda on Zapruder's film reflecting Time, Inc. loaned us a copy (return not reflected), and CLA made three additional copies. Film was for DDO/Services/SOG ~+- not for training of CIA employees -- but for VIPs. 2. Documents were shown to Rockefeller Commission because of request from Paul Hoch (see Hoch/Warren Com- mission file), and are in the denied Oswald documents package. Sr : E. Mendoza Chief, CI/PA _ Distribution: 1 - File #F 76-299 - 1 - File: Hoch, P. 1 - Chrono 1 - Warren Commission l- C1/R&A (Mr. Bradley) a0 STATE SEAL i UHL
13-00000 Se ADMINISTRATIVE - INTERNAL USE ONLY CTA -TR- 207 6 May 1997 MEMORANDUM FOR: J. Barry Harrelson anand FROM: Becky L. Rant @ DA HaTERRAL USE ONLY SUBJECT: ARRB Special Request - Zapruder Film REFERENCE: Barry: HRMMi's response follows to your request for the address of “Holmer-McMann’. This sounds like the individual you described--spelling different. As stated, McMahon resigned in 1970 and the Agency has no current address or record of whether or not he is still alive. [f you want us te pull the file to determine his address while he was an employee, let me now. That info, of course, is 28 years old. Becky TO: Becky L, Rant i OFFICE: HRM/MS/INFO COORDINATOR DATE: 05/05/97 04:41:06 PM SUBJECT: [ Re: ARRB Request Becky - | have located information on a former employee named Homer Albert McMahon, DOB: (6 Jan 1928/who {first} EOD'd 22 Sept 1952 and resigned on 20 March 1953 (GS-03) - his title was photographer. He reEOD'd on 30 Oct 1960 and resigned on 11 Sept 1970 - (GS-11) - his title was photographer and he was assigned to NPIC. HRM would have no address listing for this individual. Mr. McMahon's retired official personnel file is at Record Center. Please advise if | may be of further assistance. Jeanne No \e ‘ ce: Frieda P. Omasta Sent on 5 May 1997 at 04:41:06 PM ce: Frieda P. Omasta @ DA SIF? RG ADMINISTRATIVE - INTERNAL USE ONLY
13-00000 Document's Author: Douglas Horne/ARRB Date Created: 06/12/97 The Players . Who called whom? Dave Montague and Douglas Home called Homer A. McMahon of Witnesses/Consultants seri of the Call Date: 06/12/97 Subject: Dave Montague and Dougias Horne Calied Homer A. MeMahon (Modified on June 13, 1997) _ Summary of the Call: [See Contact Profile for details on how this individual was located.] Dave Montague located Mr. McMahon and initiated telephonic contact on June 9, 1997; | was invited to participate in the interview as the staff member most interested | in, and most familiar with, the NPIC working notes of their analysis of the Zapruder film. The following is a summary of the independent recollections of Mr. McMahon made during ARRB's cursory, initial assessment interview. Comments are not verbatim unless in quotations: -He was the Head of NPIC's color lab in 1963. At that time NPIC was no longer in NW Washington above Steuart Motors (where it was during the Cuban Missile Crisis), but had relocated to BLDG 213 in the Washington Navy Yard, following a quick 90-day renovation of a warehouse with no windows directed by Robert Kennedy. McMahon was careful to clarify that he was an employee of NPIC i in 1963, not the CIA, and that the CIA only “paid his salary." -McMahon did recall the Zapruder film analysis in some detail, and confimed ARRB's understanding that the analysis (of which frames in which shots struck occupants of the limousine) was performed at the — request of the Secret Service. He recalled that a Secret Service agent named "Bill Smith" personally brought the film over to NPIC, and that the personnel involved in the analysis were himself (McMahon), Bill Smith of the USSS, and a third person whose name McMahon would not reveal to us during the interview “because he is still current." -TIMING: McMahon thought that the analysis had occurred only °1 or 2 days" after the assassination; he also recalled that there was a great sense of urgency regarding the desired product, and that he had to “work all night long" to complete thé required work (described below). At one point he said he thought he had gone into work about 1 A.M. to commence the analysis; iater he corrected himself and said that perhaps it was more like 8 P.N., but that in any case he was sure that the work occurred after normal working hours; required him to retum to work, and that the analysis went on ail night long. -McMahon never used the name Zapruder film during the interview; he repeatedly referred to the film in question as an “amateur movie" of the assassination brought to NPIC by the Secret Service. -PROVENANCE OF THE FILM: McMahon stated that Secret Service agent Bill Smith claimed he had personally picked up the film from the amateur who had exposed it, had flown it to Rochester for developing, and had then couriered it to Washington, DC to NPIC for analysis and for the creation of
13-00000 photographic briefing boards, using still photographic prints enlarged from selected individual frames of the movie. After twice mentioning Rochester as the site where the film was developed, Dave Montague (in an attempt to specify whether McMahon was referring to R.1.T., or Kodak) asked whether he meant Kodak, and McMahon emphatically said "! mean Kodak at Rechester.* | asked him how firm he was that this is what the Secret Service agent told him, and he said he was “absolutely certain." -REASONS FOR ANALYSIS AT NPIC VICE ANOTHER LOCATION: McMahon said that USSS agent Bill Smith told him the reason the film had been couriered to NPIC was because NPIC had special, state-of-the-art enlarging equipment which Kodak did not have at Rochester. McMahon said that after the analysis of where shots occurred on the film was completed, many frames were selected ("perhaps as many as 40, but not more than about 40°) for reproduction as photographic prints, and that NPIC's special “40-20-40 enlarger” was used to magnify each desired image frame °40 times its original size for the ‘manufacture of internegatives." McMahon said that the internegatives were then used for the production of multiple color prints of each selected frame. He said that the color lab at NPIC where he worked did not prepare the actual briefing boards, but that he assumed the briefing boards were prepared somewhere else at NPIC, in some other department. -in response to clarification questions by Home, MeMahon said that af no time was the amateur movie copied as a motion picture film ,and that the only photographic work done at NPIC was to make color prints. He could not remember whether the prints were 5" X 7° format, or 8" X 10° format. -Home asked whether he was working with the original film or a copy, and McMahon stated with some certainty that he was “sure we had the original film." Home asked why, and he said that he was sure it was the original because it was Kodachrome, and because it was a “double 8° movie. Home asked him to clarify whether the home movie. was slit or unslit, and McMahon said that he was pretty sure the flim was UNSLIT, because “we had to flip it over to see the image on the other side in the correct orientation.” He said that the movie was placed in an optical printer, in which the selected frames were then magnified to 40 times their original size for the production of internegatives. He said a “liquid gate" process was used (on the home movie frames) to produce the internegatives. -Prior to the production of intemegatives and color prints for briefing boards, he said he recalled an _ analysis “to determine where the 3 shots hit." He said he would not share the results of the analysis with us on the telephone. The film was projected as a motion picture 4 or 5 times duting the analysis phase, for purposes of determining "where the 3 shots hit . Bis erste are orrama mma em, anes -At this point Home informed Mr. ‘McMahon that CIA's HRG had d deposited a surviving briefing board and the original working notes in the JFK Collection in 1993 for access by the public, and that they were - not classified. Montague promised to send McMahon an information package explaining the JFK Act and the Review Board's mandate, and Horne and Montague asked Mr. McMahon is he would be willing to submit to a formal, in-depth, recorded interview at Archives [I with the briefing board and the working notes available to him during the interview. He agreed. -McMahon explained that the working notes were “prepared jointly by the 3 of us working on the project that night.” END
13-00000 CALL REPORT: PUBLIC Document's Author: Douglas Home/ARRB = Date Created: 06/17/97 e rs Who called whom? Douglas Horne called Roland ("Rollie") Zavada of Witnesses/Consultants D io Date: 06/16/97 Subject: Doug Horne Called Roille Zavada Summary of the Cail: As requested by Jeremy Gunn, | called Rollie Zavada to pursue questions the ARRB staff has about the developing and processing of 8 mm film; Jim Milch had given me permission to contact Rollie directiy on an informal basis. | asked Rollie whether copies of the original Zapruder film could have been properly exposed on a contact printer using Kodachrome |i daylight film, vice Kodachrome HA (designed for a tungsten light source). He said the answer was yes, but that the exposure would be extremely slow, because more exposure time would be needed for the Kodachrome II (daylight) film than for the Tungsten film. He -@laborated by saying that with Kodachrome II film in the contact printer vice Kodachrome IIA, that the’ required exposure per frame might be one fourth of a second per frame, vice one one-hundredth of a second per frame with Kodachrome IIA; he said that the contact printer would have to be operated much slower with Kodachrome il flim than with Kodachrome liA. [Background: the 11/22/63 affidavits executed by Zapruder with the Jamieson and Kodak film lab people cite Kodachrome II film as the medium used for copying the original assassination movie, not Kodachrome IIA; however, the edge print on the 2 Secret Service copies at NARA reads “Kodachrome IIA."] After | informed Rollie of the apparent discrepancy between the affidavits and the two Secret Service copies, he said that to him-there was not necessarily any discrepancy. He said that the “product type” was Kodachrome 11, whether the film was Il (daylight) or IIA (tungsten light source), and that the designation IIA vice II simply indicates a variation in color balance, but not a change in product type. He said that we should not necessarily interpret the apparent discrepancy between the affidavits and the edge print on the Secret Service copies at NARA as important, because a “film person" would quite possibly describe only product type, and not address color balance, in ordinary conversation. He elaborated that a reading lamp is 2800 degrees Kelvin; a contact printer light source is 3200 degrees Kelvin; and sunlight is about 5000 degrees Kelvin. i next asked him questions about how Kodak labs routinely punched numbers into double 8 mm film following processing (developing). He said the following: : -the unique, punched numbers would routinely be punched into the tail end of side two of the double 8 mm movie film following developing; -one reason for this is because the emulsion number (a 7 digit punched number) was always punched into the head end of side one at the factory. | asked him where physical splices might normally appear in a normally processed film coming out of a Kodak lab. His answers follow: -there shouid normally be 3 splices, as follows: -one between the white leader and the beginning of the film (so that the film could be threaded info the projector); one in the middle marrying side one and side two after slitting; and one at the tail end, if leader was added to the tail of the film.
13-00000 | asked him whether there were any reason to normally separate (cut) the punched number applied by the processing lab off of the tail end of side two of the film and splice it into another part of the film, and he said “no, not unless there was a lot of fogged area on the developed film between the end of the image and the punched number." ; I discussed with him Jim Milch's e-mail of 6/12/97 regarding “a film in his possession which was . processed in Rochester." Rollie explained that his film is a private home movie, not an assassination film. He said it is proof that a film processed (developed) in Rochester would have an "R" in the edge print. He said he would photocopy the edge print and mail it to me so that | can see what the Rochester lab marking looks like, and then compare this edge print to the edge print on the various films at NARA. Rollie then discussed potential camera tests using a Bell and Howell camera of the same model as Abe Zapruder's. He said that further research he has done indicates that the "inertial effect" may be peculiar or unique to Zapruder's individual camera, and may not occur in other cameras of the same model. [This has implications for proposed ARRB camera tests.] Rollie said he would be on vacation from July 10-August 2, inclusive, but would be available after that for any, business we might wish to conduct. END.
13-00000 pine ay EEE OEE Mica we Reesas e+ ox, Be dopo ciammn so. Soave pisses Sretcc[ | | Mr. Roland J, Zavada | oes ‘Pittsford, NY 14534-3407. [00 SST greece etcle abso an flan 63 Proct. Felng ae YES TRS 5 se Creer as Leia see a a3 pt e. Srna te wie et ce AN Be : SEER Vhs a EPIRA AD tt SANA AE AREA EP OT CRED TS Ruepaneeentierie ane nin one, SEEUE ER ote amen pea aries CRTC RIK cas ESA saa SES OI AET ER Gare
13-00000 peat me ee wn Ber ben's caine s+ Hie. ane dat dn’ intial sro TERR TEA, ee . Mr. Roland J, Zavada 21 Cottonwood La, - _ A Pittsford, NY 14534-3407 [700 prrcees atcle -abjo am = — PIR 63 Praci filmy Py
13-00000 ZMPeupek- Ftay (gnu 6,144) ) j[Heniotieone E sater/ Feta] I: 3 tne CETERS oN bine ry sae] Fal) Conse | “ DAE Cape STALT— ¢ ObzenTaaos +  Wten epee PRene 2 Peso Connery , Bask ( Satz) S206. OF Fotm zs “UP Tewarn Vzewsels eves , SPRoekey, Hoss ARE ani TE Lest nib IMAGE Fegemes wRE. Atso FesD Cor eecrV
13-00000 Capy + t (Tory lé(¢9F ) KESASSINATEON SeQuen Ge PLAZA) » [Fessibone A] 1.1: 9 10 (Buce Lenses oni D K (haere Le reps : And DAyE_ WHEE PURPLE. BACKER EUW) SAFETY Kaan SEENTRG SN | eek Eowy) Sade UP wend Home Move” SeQpueni@e_ = PLOdesser 2 y Keats © D nov 63 BLuc(Tvp@uo TRE ) Lemees}_- | (Gureeampoced OVeR Buc Lemeprnig 38 SAFELY FIM) RESD PACE WARDS “| “ey Feld) CaprecyLy Pa Paarl? Ponce < ter ann SNe 1D tree | aw rh»)
13-00000 . e a 4 2 ELSE —Prant a SK RET Soeisee_ MARS NUTon| SEDUENCE(Deacey Pised) [Peoacieome IFA] Il 26 1OA QC brscte. Lernéees oN D iN Ane. A unads WHt>e.—PyePls F28t0) D> AnD | Dene. cone) | | CRENTA GN ¢ Base (Sty ) song "yp" Wideant home Movze" sepuevae. : MroakeseD bY Kory, - D nov 63 Vane oe TUE QUEzSE Lemens) 7 A BULE Verszeal. 72 Als®: THE. Wards SAFery FEtM" OUBeLAP BREA SNe im PP
13-00000 Document's Author: Douglas Home/ARRB Date Created: 06/18/97 eeting Lo Date: Ot 06/17/97 Agecny Name: CIA Attendees: Morgan Benneit Hunter (Ben Hunter) was interviewed by Doug Hore, Jeremy Gunn, Dave Montague, and Michelle Combs ‘Topic: ARRB Staff Interviewed Ben Hunter (Grammatical Edits Made on June 19, 1997) (Final Edit Made June 20, 1997) Summary ofthe Meeting = ARRB staff interviewed Ben Hunter on June 17, 1997. The interview was arranged by HAG at ARRB's request. Mr. Hunter had remarked to his wife (an HRG employee), during C-Span coverage of . the Review Board's Zapruder film public hearing, that he had worked on an analysis of the film at NPIC in 1963 shortly after the assassination. His wife relayed that fact, and the name of his supervisor at NPIC (who aiso worked on the Z-film analysis), Mr. Homer A. McMahon, to the ARRIB via Barry Harrelson at HRG. Previous to this interview, ARRB staff had conducted a brief initial assessment interview of Mr. _ McMahon on the telephone. Mr. Hunter was on active duty in the USAF prior to working for NPIC (National Photo Interpretation | Center). While in the Air Force as an enlisted man (at Offut Air Force Base in Nebraska, at SAC Headquarters), he received photographic training and worked on “special processing" programs, which he explained were aerial and early satellite photography (reconnaissance) products. He said he was offered a job at NPIC before he left the Air Force. He said he left the Air Force on 30 November 1962, started working at NPIC (then located at Sth and K Streets in the Steuart Ford dealership building in NW Washington) on 17 December 1962, and helped NPIC move to its new quarters at BLDG 213 in the Washington Navy Yard on January 1, 1963. He said that he worked on the same kind of aerial/satellite reconnaissance products at NPIC as he did in the Air Force; he specifically mentioned that NPIC had the capability to handle 70 mm KH4 film, and 9.5" U-2 KHB.film. He said that the majority of his experience in the Air Force was with B & W film, because ail of the reconnaissance film in those days was B & W. He said that he assisted Homer McMahon in establishing the Color Lab at NPIC sometime during 1968, after working 6-9 months in the B & W section.at NPIC; he said Homer McMahon was the head of the new color lab. and was his supervisor. Just prior to leaving the Air Force, and just after joining NPIC, Mr. Hunter said he did a lot of work on reconnaissance photography of surveillance of Cuba during, and following, the Cuban Missile Crisis. He said much of the work was follow-up photography to ensure that the Soviet missiles really had left Cuba. Mr. Hunter said he did participate i in an NPIC event involving the Zapruder film in 1963, but cautioned at the beginning of the interview that his memory of this event was “extremely fuzzy," and told us repeatedly that Mr. Homer McMahon's memory was probably much better than his. Listed below is a. summary of the essential pieces of information he passed to us during the interview: ~He recalled that he and Homer McMahon worked with the Zapruder film very shortly after the assassination in 1963, just 2 or 3 days afterwards. At another point he said it may have been the next day (Saturday) or Sunday, November 24, and that he thought it was prior to the funeral of President Kennedy. He recalled that no one else from NPIC (other than he and Homer McMahon) was in the building, which ’ means it was almost certainly the weekend of the assassination; he also recalled that he had to drive in
13-00000 from home to do this job, and that he was not already at work when the project was assigned. -He recalled that a "Captain Sands” delivered the home movie of the assassination to him and Homer McMahon; he thought Sands (a person in civilian clothes whom was simply addressed as "Captain") was probably with the CIA Office of Security, or perhaps was the NPIC Head of Security, but could not be sure today. He said that another person may have been present, or arrived with Sands, but could not remember much about that. Later in the interview, when he was asked whether he remembered any — Secret Service involvement, he said that our question did ring a bell with him, and that yes, he did believe there may have been a Secret Service employee present. He said that the others (Sands, the person with Sands, and McMahon) were already present when he arrived. He said Sands remained “close by," observing the work, while he and McMahon handled and worked with the Zapruder film. ' -He said Sands directed that he and McMahon not talk about their work that night with anyone, not even anyone else at NPIC, and that if people were to press him on it, they were to be directed to call Captain Sands. In fact, when he put in for overtime for the Zapruder film work, Hunter said he would not tell the Head of the Photographic Lab the reason, the person became upset, and he had to direct that supervisor to call Captain Sands for an explanation. . -The Zapruder film was not copied as a motion picture; in fact, Hunter said that NPIC did not have that capability for color movies, since they were in the business of still, B & W reconnaissance photography for the most part. He said that the assigned task was to analyze (i.e., locate on the film) where occupants of the limousine were wounded, including “studying frames leading up to shots," and then produce color prints from appropriate frames just prior to shots, and also frames showing shots impacting limousine occupants. He recalled laying the home movie out on a light table and using a loupe to examine individual frames. He could not recall whether they received any instructions as to number of shots, or any guidance as to where to look in the film. . -He recalled making internegatives from about 8 total selected frames from the movie, and then making multiple (number uncertain) 8" X 10° or 9" X 9" color prints from the intemegatives. The machine used for manufacture of the internegatives was a “10 X 20 X 40 enlarger." He said that on initial attempts, the intemegative size was 8" X 10°, but that later the size of the internegs was “cut down." By this he did not mean cropped, but that the final internegs used were smaller than the initial size of 8° X 10°. He said that the process of selecting frames of interest, and the production of the intemegatives, took a minimum of 1 to 2 hours, and perhaps a maximum of 3 te 4 hours to accomplish. iesearte a le tad mes “He did not personally participate i in the making of any briefing boards, athough he said he would not - be surprised to find out that someone else at NPIC may have. -His memories of film content were limited to seeing a skull explosion, bone fragments, and Jackie Kennedy crawling on the trunk of the car. Apparently to those involved that night the film was only referred to as a “home movie,” but he seemed convinced that it was the Zapruder film based on subsequent viewings of it over the years in documentaries. He had no independent recollection of which way the President's head moved (forwards or backwards) from his memories of work that night. He recalled that there were 2 or 3 frames showing the "head explosion," which he alternatively described as *a cloud of material surrounding President Kennedy's head.” -His impression is that the film was probably in 16 mm format, but was not of an unslit double-8 mm film. It was his strong impression that they were working with the original, but when asked whether there were images present between the sprocket holes, he said that it was his reasonably strong impression’ today that there were no such images present between the sprocket holes in the film he examined at NPIC. At one point he described the film as “not high resolution." -All materials created or used had to be tumed in to Sands upon completion of their work: the motion
13-00000 picture film itself; finished prints (of approximately 8 views); test prints (made for the purpose of determining color balance); test internegatives; and the final intemegatives used to make the prints. -As he talked during the interview, his estimates of the amount of time involved to do this work expanded, to the point where by the end of the interview, he was convinced that the entire job probably took a minimum of between 5-7 hours to accomplish. Before talking with us about the details of the "process, he said he would initially have estimated only 2-3 hours of work. He recalled that the work started during the daytime, and ended during the night-time. -When asked, he said he did recall counting frame numbers (i.e., counting off the location of selected frames) on the movie film. -When asked if he or his co-worker McMahon made any notes, he said that he had no specific recollection of having done so, but that if they did, the notes were probably related to color correction (..e., use of filters). -EXAMINATION OF NPIC WORKING NOTES: The NPIC working notes, released twice in response to FOIA lawsuits as "CIA document 450," are numbered today as RIF # 1993.07.22.08:41 077620600, Agency File number 80T01357A, JFK Box # JFK39. The original working notes were placed in the JFK Collection at NARA in 1993 by the CIA's HRG, along with one surviving briefing board (which consists of 4 panels). The briefing board is also in JFK Box # "JFK39," which is one large flat containing the four briefing board panels (RIF # 1993.07.21.15:48:04:930600) and the original working notes from NPIC. This interview was conducted at a CiA office space, not at Archives Il in College Park. Consequently, ARRB staff had.a good photocopy of the working notes with them, but not the briefing board. -Comments of Mr. Hunter during examination of the NPIC working notes are summarized below: ----He recognized his handwriting on only one page: the handwritten page which describes the organization of the briefing board panels; and on this page, he only recognized two words (the column headers "Print #" and “Frame #") as being written in his hand. He said the remainder of the writing on this half-page was not his. He did not remember seeing the page before, or witnessing its creation, or writing on it-he simply recognized the writing for two of the column headers as his. ---He did not recognize any of the other pages in the NPIC working notes, nor did he think that such activity (e.g., 3 different shot scenarios, and calculation of seconds between shols at two different camera speeds) took place during the night he and Mr. McMahon performed their work. He-was of the belief that the activity described in the NPIC working notes occurred during a second event at NPIC, one which occurred after the work done by he and Mr. McMahon. ----He said that to him, the kind of analysis represented by the NPIC notes looked like it may have been done by mensuration experts at NPIC, and said that if this were the case, he would think that candidates for this kind of analysis would be either Todd Augustine, Allan Gill, or Steve Clark. -—-He said that he could recall no discussion of the film speed of the camera which.took the assassination movie (whereas in the notes, both a 16 FPS, and an 18 FPS, timing scenario for shots is laboriously computed in longhand). ----He said at one point that °l think this was done again” during the tenure of the Warren Commission. -—-Even after viewing the NPIC notes referring to three sets each of 28 individual selected frames, he did not waver from his opinion that only about 8 frames were selected for reproduction that night by he and Mr. McMahon. Mr. Gunn asked Mr. Hunter to review his pay stubs from 1963 to see if he could determine, from overtime records, the timing of this event. Mr. Hunter agreed. At the conclusion of the interview Mr. Hunter expressed a desire to get together with Mr. McMahon and talk about these events from 1963. We asked him to defer until after we had formally interviewed Mr.
13-00000 McMahon, in person. Jeremy Gunn then suggested that on the day we schedule a formal McMahon interview at NARA, that we invite Mr. Hunter the same day so that following the McMahon interview, both men could view the briefing board and original notes together and share their impressions with each other. Mr. Hunter said he liked that idea. END
13-00000 CALLREPORT eee Document's Author: Douglas Horne/ARRB _—— Date Created: 06/26/97 The Who called whom? Douglas Horne called Morgan Bennett Hunter (Ben Hunter) of CIA escription of the Ca Date: "06/26/97 Subject: Doug Horne Called Ben Hunter Summary of the Call: | spoke briefly with Ben Hunter to say that the July 2, 1997 interview of Mr. McMahon had been cancelled (at his--Ben Hunter's-request) and that Mr. McMahon had rejected the tentative rescheduled interview date of July 11 (for the same reason Hunter had been unavailable on July 2—vacation). | told him there was no scheduled date now for our interview with Homer McMahon, and that my instructions _ were to interview Homer McMahon as soon as practical, at a time convenient to Mr. McMahon. I told him that if he (Ben Hunter) was available at that time, we would include him; otherwise, we would schedule a second viewing of the briefing board panels for him subsequent to the McMahon interview. Following discussion of these logistical details, Mr. Hunter said that he had been thinking about the events at NPIC which he discussed with us, and wished to amend his previous comments as follows: -He said he now recalls that a Secret Service agent did deliver the materials to NPIC; -He said he now believes it was the Secret Service agent who said “don't discuss this with anyone, and if people persist in knowing what you were doing, refer them to Captain Sands;* -He said he now is fairly certain that Captain Sands was a high-ranking employee in NPIC's management structure, possibly the second or third highest ranking member of the organization. He does still recall that Sands was present during the NPIC event he discussed with ys--the manufacture of intemegatives and prints from selected frames of the Zapruder film. Mr. Hunter said that he still wants to talk with Homer McMahon, even if they cannot view the photographic briefing board panels together due to schedule conflicts. | told him this was fine, but that we wanted to interview Mr. McMahon first, and promised to pass McMahon's telephone number to him after ARRB had concluded its discussions with McMahon. END
13-00000 CONFIDENTIAL. a eer eel ‘ ct By: G1T6a7N CL REASOM: Section 1.5 C pect om: X1 ory Fam: 1-62 COV Ta: Becky L. Rant @ DA FROM: J. Barry Harrelson OFFICE: CSUKRG DATE: ~ 07/09/97 02:06:56 PM SUBJECT: (?4Re: ARRB Request - Original Text of J. Barry Harrelson Original Text of Becky L. Rant Original Text of J. Barry Harrelson ARRB has requested information on former CIA employee, John Sands. He is reported to have been a Security Officer at NPIC in Movember 1993 and may be familiar with the Zapruder film. Can we confirm that he was at NPIC in Nov. 1993? if so, the ARRB staff - will probably want to interview him and may request that we contact him. We need to know current address and cover status. Barry: 1993 or 19637 Sorry - 1963. ce: Becky Rant @ oR DST, Bonnie Hunter Sent on 9 July 1997 at 02:06:56 PM CONFIDENTIAL
13-00000 Document's Author: Douglas Horne/ARRB — Date Created: 07/15/97 Meeting Logistics Date: 07/14/97 Agecny Name: Witnesses/Consultants Attendees: Homer McMahon, Jeremy Gunn, Doug Home, Michelle Combs, and Marie Fagnant Topic: ARRB Interviewed Homer McMahon Summary of the Meeting | ARRB staff followed up its June 9, 1997 telephonic initial assessment interview of Mr. McMahon with an in-depth, in-person interview at Archives {1 during which the original working notes from NPIC and a surviving photographic briefing board could be used as exhibits to test the recollections of the witness. The interview was audiotaped; therefore, this meeting report will only recount substantive highlights of the interview. (All statements which read as if they were "facts" are actually Mr. McMahon‘ $s recounting of events as he remembers them in 1897.) Mr. McMahon was manager of the NPIC (National Photo Interpretation Center) color lab in 1963. About two days after the assassination of President Kennedy, but before the funeral took piace, a Secret Service agent named “Bill Smith" delivered an amateur film of the assassination to NPIC and requested that color prints be made of frames believed associated with wounding (“frames in which shots occurred’), for purposes of assembling a briefing board. Mr. Smith did not explain who the briefing boards wouid be for, or who would be briefed. The only persons who witnessed this activity (which McMahon described as an “all night job") were USSS agent Smith, Homer McMahon, and Ben Hunter (McMahon's assistant). Although no materials produced were stamped with classification markings, Smith told McMahon that the subject matter was to be treated as “above top secret;" McMahon said that not even his supervisor was allowed to know what he had worked on, nor was his supervisor allowed to participate. Smith told McMahon that he had personally picked up the film (in an undeveloped condition.from the man wha exposed it) in Dallas, flown it to Rochester, N.Y. (where it was developed by Kodak), and then flown it down to NPIC in Washington so that enlargements of selected frames could be made on NPIC's state-of-the-art equipment. After the film (either an unsilit original or possibly a duplicate) was viewed more than once on a 16 mm projector in a briefing room at NPIC, the original (a double-8 mm unslit original) was placed in a 10X20X40 precision enlarger, and 5° X 7° format internegatives were made from selected frames. A full-immersion *wet-gate’ or liquid gate process was used on the original film to reduce refractivity of the film and maximize the optical quality of the intemegatives. Subsequently, three each 5" X 7° contact prints were made from the intemegatives. He recalled that a minimum of 20, and a maximum of 40 frames were duplicated via internegatives and prints. All prints, internegatives, and scraps were turned over to Bill Smith at the conclusion of the work. Some working notes were created on a yellow legal pad, and they were turned over also. At the conclusion of the work, McMahon said he knew that briefing boards were going to be constructed at NPIC from the prints, but he did not participate in that, and did not know who did. McMahon stated definitively that at no point did NPIC reproduce the assassination movie (the Zapruder film) as a motion picture; all NPIC did was produce internegatives and color prints of selected still frames. Although the process of selecting which frames depicted events surrounding the wounding of limousine occupants (Kennedy and Connally) was a ‘joint process," McMahon said his opinion, which was that President Kennedy was shot 6 to 8 times from at least three directions, was ultimately ignored, and the opinion of USSS agent Smith, that there were 3 shots from behind from the Book Depository,
13-00000 ultimately was employed in selecting frames in the movie for reproduction. At one point he said “you can't fight city hall,” and then reminded us that his job was to produce intermegatives and photographs, not to do analysis. He said that it was clear that the Secret Service agent had previously viewed the film and already had opinions about which frames depicted woundings. At one point in the interview, Mr. McMahon described in some detail various health-related memory problems which he claims to suffer from. Details are on the tape. Toward the end of the interview, McMahon was shown the NPIC working notes and ihe surviving , briefing board (there are four panels), which are both in the JFK Collection in flat # 90A. - NPIC Working Notes: McMahon recognized the half-sized sheet of yellow legal paper containing a handwritten description of briefing board panel contents, and on its reverse side containing a description of the work performed that night and how long each step took, as being written in his own handwriting (and partially in Ben Hunter's). He said that three other full-length yellow legal pad pages of notes . (containing three possible 3-shot scenarios, a 16 FPS and 18 FPS timing analysis, and additional timing computations) were not in his handwriting, and were not made by him or previously seen by him. : McMahon looked at the 28 photographs on all four briefing board panels, ’ and said that he had made all of them; he also said that some were missing. l-asked him which types of images that he had produced he thought were missing, and he said he thought motorcade images from prior to frame 188 (/.e., earlier in the motorcade, before the limousine disappeared behind the’roadsign) - were the photographs he produced which were not on the briefing board panels. He said it looked to him like the prints he had produced had been trimmed, i.e., made smaller. END
13-00000 , Can ry G so . ry f a P 8 ae REACH ee fn toe mes ant TOMATO peadts ce comms fepe segammar & *t bmemns manent ys ee sete aly. | 2 flog tee | ag |
13-00000 ” \ te Z cot. c ¥ i oF a 4 Mas ”
13-00000 EASED ON IS ERS As REPORTE § , NO) LIFE (ARCA ZINE i LIFE | OTHE R, a " MAGAZINE . POSSIBILITIES | FRAMES SECONDS i Frames on] SRCONDS f ON WHICH | BE TWEEN wo HicH Bitw EAN f SHOTS : S Hers: Sitters ' * Sitors OccuR | oceur @ . S&conps BrTwernd SH ot Print’ | F aame Se Ge a + pecs te = nis ter enes sare “24 = a“ D 3 a ~ Perera tease eos etter apm a : ? 72 ofETUAMES a ¢ t d ' nearer sco : ee - +e one ame gree fio t . : . " ry 3 a 0%, : ve sien ates 3 ette DA) aera be fee Be ete he aiarisios
13-00000 EP EeS|~ “2 FPS. than jt shtevla have Seen rv th] me LIFE. MRC A ZIV. / An Hrroat ale, | 7 Framyvs ; 7 ; later” ete ee te 4, / seconds nal % l “Fiaenegs ae Bese fab: | i ae sare srenenceees eemsamnl ones one o - wo ules ue 32 : (6-0... on i Lacerda od LFF PS - Ne @r gave cee ° ose 8 arr as wl oe ce Ai Aish ili ay, we, " a iv Ay ; , ie " au age @ A é ‘ . ‘ Sabie Geb rate Batts eee ile au Re : ot Ber hb)
13-00000 re ee . at . 8 , a . , , 78 . , a . ¢ a . . ae . . PANEL I . | PANEL IIT. - PANEL IIT. PANEL IV Print Frame . Print Frame Print Frame Print Frame VE No... _No. - _No. No. : No. No. | No. _No. 1° ° 188 7 22500 15 266°. ah 310 198 8 226 - 16 274 - 22 311 206 9 B30 7 - 47 289 23- 312 213 302-39, iC Q—“‘i RB 217 1l 0 he 19 291 25 314 | 222 12 246 Dam 20. . 292 26 320 13° 256 ee ea | 27 334 14 | 257; | - . | 28 384 A a + oa * ° in . On ote e a are ear . . , Bt . ot a . : ‘ - “ i zy ATT LIGNITE &
13-00000 UM | DECLASSIC MEMORAND | DECLASSIICi INTE OO July 16, 1997 TO: David Marwell . Jeremy Gunn FROM: Doug Horne SUBJECT: Interviews With Former NPIC Employees About Their Involvement With the Zapruder Film in November 1963 1. In June and July, 1997, through fortuitous circumstance, ARRB became cognizant of, and was able to interview, both CIA NPIC (National Photographic Interpretation Center) employees involved in 1963 with photographic reproduction of the Zapruder film of President Kennedy’s assassination. [See attached interview reports with Ben Hunter (dated 6/17/97 and 6/26/97), and with Homer McMahon (dated 6/12/97 and 7/14/97).] As a result of these interviews, ARRB staff determined that the undated — | _ NPIC working notes (see attached) which pertain to processing activity involving the Zapruder film in 1963 have been misinterpreted by many researchers as indicating that NPIC made three copies of the motion picture film for unknown reasons shortly after the assassination. (I made this assumption myself, in memos dated October 18, 1995 and April 9, 1997.) Our interviews with Homer McMahon (NPIC color lab manager in 1963) and Ben Hunter (his assistant in 1963, and the only other NPIC employee present during processing of the Zapruder film) in June and July of 1997 revealed that the processing memorialized by the NPIC working notes (i.e., “shoot internegs...print test...make. three prints @”) refers only to the reproduction of selected still frames as color prints, with the _ manufacture of greatly magnified individual 8 mm movie frames as internegatives as the intermediate step in this process. It is now clear that the NPIC working notes do not refer to the reproduction of the Zapruder film as a motion picture, but rather, only to the production of three sets each of 28 selected still frames for the purpose of making briefing boards. 2. During our two interviews with Mr. McMahon, he remembered with great certainty that the Secret Service agent who couriered the Zapruder film to NPIC told him that the original film, and the duplicate movies struck from it, were all developed at Rochester, N.Y. by Kodak. This, of course, is contrary to the existing documentary trail which indicates otherwise—namely, that the original film and the three first generation copies were all developed by Kodak in Dallas. (See my memo of April 9, 1997 for copies of the affidavits executed by Abraham Zapruder, his letter to C.D. Jackson of LIFE, and Secret _ Service documents which all indicate that the original film and three copies were Horne e:\wp-docs\edgeprnt.wpd File: 4.0.2 (Zapruder Film)
13-00000 2 developed in Dallas on November 22, 1963.) Nevertheless, Mr. McMahon’s memory of this statement by the Secret Service agent is quite firm, so ARRB staff decided to re- examine the edge print on the original Zapruder film and the two Secret Service copies to see if there was any evidence present of developing in Rochester, vice Dallas. Mr. Rollie Zavada, a former career employee with Kodak, provided me with a photographic reproduction of what edge print would look like on an 8 mm film developed in Rochester (see attached); using this example as a control, I visited Archives II today, and assisted by Alan Lewis of NARA, examined the edge print on the original film and the ‘two Secret Service copies for any evidence of having been processed in Rochester. Summarizing the results of my examination, I could find no.“R” for Rochester anywhere on the edge print of either the original film, or the two Secret Service copies, which are first generation. However, I did notice that both Secret service copies exhibit edge print which reads as follows: “Processed by Kodak D Nov 63.” I presume that this capital “D,” found in the edge print on the home movie portions of Secret Service copies 1 and 2, probably stands for “Dallas.” I will raise this question with Mr. Zavada of Kodak | (who is presently on vacation) next month. Thus, at the present time, there is no physical or documentary evidence I am aware of which supports developing in Rochester, and considerable documentary and some physical evidence which supports developing of the original and first generation copies-in Dallas. 3. The final three attachments to this memo are hand-drawn, detailed reproductions of the edge print as observed by me today on the film designated as the original by NARA, and Secret Service copies 1 and 2. Edge print observations made during past examinations were not done with this degree of care, and were not memorialized with this degree of precision. « Horne e:\wp-docs\edgeprnt.wpd File: 4.0.2 (Zapruder Film)
13-00000 . ; «SECRET ee ct By 611637? Ci REASON: Section 1.5 C oece on: X1 ory Fred: Multiple 20 July 1997 MEMORANDUM FOR: A DST -@00 FROM: J. Barry Harrelson OFFICE: “— CSIHRG SUBJECT: ARRB Request| i Capehart REFERENCE: A revisit of two old requests: (DA, DS&T} Zapruder film - Homer McMahon, NPIC Tech who worked on the film, said it was developed (ps in Rochester, NY, at a lab headed by a Bill (Witiam] ro we have anything ona rT the Eastman Kodak | ster that developed NPIC film? (DA, 00, OS&T) Claude Barnes Capehart - ARRB staff have reviewed the litigation material at OGC and have raised additional questions. They requested a complete file search, 201, OP, OS-etc. Does the DS&T have any files on Capehart? ce: Sent on 20 July 1997 at 03:25:13 PM SECRET
13-00000 - Lop AV OL \ oo ADMINISTRATIVE - INTERNAL USE ONLY TO: Frieda P. Omasta @ DA FROM: (" Jeanie Kardaras'@ OA OFFICE: HRM/MSIINFO COORDINATOR DATE: 07/23/97 12:55:29 PM SUBJECT: {2}Re: ARRB Request -(Green)& Capehart Frieda - Based on information provided, { have found no information on the following individual: Bill (William) Greenjat the Eastman Kodak lab The search undertaken was reasonably calculated to uncover all responsive records. Please advise if | may be of further assistance. ce: Becky L. Rant @ DA, J. Barry Harrelson, (Thomas C. Benza @ DA,W. Curtis Chalones/@ DA Sent on 23 July 1997 at 12:55:29 PM ADMINISTRATIVE - INTERNAL USE ONLY
13-00000 CL BY: 0000000 €L REASOR: Section 1.5 C pect on: XT pav crea: Multiple 23 July 1997 MEMORANDUM FOR: Jeanne! eKardaege DA (We Curtis ‘Chaloneri@ DA FROM: frieda P. Omastai@ DA OFFICE: " ADAIIRO SUBJECT: ARRB Request - Green & Capehart REFERENCE: Search on Bill Green only . Jeanne, Tam and Curt: Jose) As noted in Barry Harrelson's note below, Homer McMahon advised that the Zapruder film was developed at Hawkeye. works in Rechester, NY, at a lab headed by Mr. Bill (Witliam)(Gréen; Accordingly, would you please check your files to see if you you have any information on Mr. Green| at the Eastman Kodak tab in Rochester? Please respond directly to Barry with an information copy to Becky Rant and to myself. Thank you again for your assistance. Frieda Original Text of J. Barry Harrelson ce: Becky L. Rant @ DA J. Barry Harrelson Sent on 23 July 1997 at 10:34:26 AM SECRET © SECRET . ap.
13-00000 DRAFT Background and Questions for DI DATE Zapruder Film In 1975, the CIA forwarded to the Rockefeller Commission undated internal working _ notes from the CIA's NPIC (National Photographic Interpretation Center) then under the Directorate of Intelligence, which indicate that at one time, NPIC conducted an analysis of the Zapruder film to determine which frames could be equated with JFK 6 > gunshots, and how many seconds had elapsed between shots. A typewritten, undated _ memo (presumably prepared on May 13, 1975), which forwarded these working papers { *~ x within the agency, implies that the NPIC had performed the analysis at the request of the U.S. Secret Service. My analysis of the working notes from NPIC has led me to conclude that NPIC’s work was conducted approximately between December 6, and December 20, 1963. Reasoning follows: the NPIC notes reference LIFE magazine's own analysis of the shots as one of _ the three scenarios they considered, and quote verbatim from LIFE's December 6, 1963 issue; furthermore, the NPIC analyst is not sure whether the Zapruder film was shot at 16 or 18 frames per second-and the FBI concluded on December 20, 1963 that the operating speed of Zapruder's camera was an average of 18.3 frames per second. Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that this analysis took place between the time the December 6, 1963 issue of LIFE hit the news stands, and December 20, 1963, the date the FBI determined the operating speed of Zapruder's Bell and Howell camera. QUESTIONS The second-to-last page of the NPIC handwritten notes contains the following entries: -Shoot Internegs 1.5 hr -Proc & dry 2 hr _ «Print Test 1 hr -Make 3 prints lhr -Proc & dry 1.5 hr (Total) 7 hrs Question #1: Who directed NPIC to make the 3 copies of the Zapruder film? (CIA, or an external DRAFT NOTE ORS Ly 2p town 4g C bn pete NePent rele Senile
13-00000 DRAFT 7 Te nj Le (AP asp abn agency? For what stated purpose?) Ch 4 oo FLY | v AE Sé . Question #2: To whom were the 3 copies delivered? ~~ “SO G- a Any documents which would shed light on the above questions, including NPIC personnel rosters from December, 1963, should be made available for ARRB staff review. C23 antrnd jor Sim ows — (Zz € grk SOC RAY Aten O- ae he
13-00000 7 RUAREETTA NLF MR Case No A313 es tg Document No._#e “A BO ESE Be BS Bs ta ed , ; NPIC Analysis of Zapruder Filming of John F. Kennedy Assassination Information was forwarded to the Commission previously on this matter in connection with our comments on the Hoch memo- randum. On 8 May 1975, Mr. Olsen asked for copies of any memoranda or: ‘other textual information provided to the Secret Service by CIA after NPIC's analysis. ‘of the Zapruder film. We have no indication in ‘our records that any such written material "was provided to the Secret Service. Attached are copies of the only textual matter in our files pertaining to NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film. We do not know whether the Secret Service -took copies of these notes at the time of the analysis. eOLp°.. f = & es = rome 7 a i, 7 we a * Fa “Mon, oo whe 2 sotembarme tet 1, ot tees en a i hn i or Sd mes same 8 Gem es e Lt ee em Th geben owe 2 mpoer ct wy 18186 reg” ONFDENTAT Eo = ESE GERALD R. FORD LIBerev mp Naha ean inte bad
13-00000 og — oie a «GUA ISTORIGRL RENE PRoGaAN ee Sle ‘3 fb . Zeke sae "ae «ant Mile nae Brett cm ettatiB pao 2 hen BeAr nd on hg &! Obe- Aaausis oF Zacgeupek iim
13-00000 “Oren ae Ji Puce 3 YS ‘ JAR ° : : aot ie 3 e : “V4 May 1975 ee es . . Be 4 8 ff te $e ey fo Be . ° " | tm t- Mr. Robert B. Qisen am . nes Beery Senior Couasel : os . | & oe bos Commission oa CIN Activities ae es zi ia —--Within the United States - Be em - Deac Mr. Olsen: : JE ca ° You recently asked for any textual materials ee that may have been provided by the Agency to the - .” peg oO Secret Service in connection with the NPIC - pes ° -. analysis of the Zapradec film. oe . ee - . . . . . ° -* ee my -  , The only textual material involved Is attached. | _ lTunderstand you have had a meeting with NPIC ; - authorities to go into some of the background. i- Faithiclly yours, , mo . . * ° ° B . & tt j . Attachment: als
13-00000 APEC tuastveds ob Tayo Of Joke FL Kennedv Assa<s Information was forwarded to the Comtission previously on this matter in connection with cur comments on the Hoch reno- randum. On S May 1975, Hr. Olsen ashed for copics of any ; remoranda er other textual information provided ta the Scerct . an , - Service by CIA after NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film. We . . 7 . . have no indication in our records that any such written material was provided to the Sccret Service. Attached are copies of the only textual matter in our files pertaining to NPIC's analysis ef the Zapruder film. We do not know whether the Secret Service * : took copies of these notes at the tine of the analysis.-
MEMORANDUM FOR: VIA: FROM: SUBJECT: REFERENCE : FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 24 July 1997 J.. Barry Harrelson DCI/CSI/HRG Becky Rant DDA/IRO Vanet A. Ecklun — Chief, Information Management Branch Office of Personnel Security Assassination Records Review Board Name Trace Request on William Greer Lotus Note dated 23 July 1967 1. - In response to the referenced request, the Office of Personnel Security's Management Data Program/Personnel Security (MDP/PS) database was searched as requested. 2. The searches undertaken were reasonably calculated to retrieve all responsive documents. Based upon the information provided, no security records were located. 3. This memorandum is provided for your information ‘and appropriate disposition. Please direct any further inquiries regarding this matter to W. Curtis Chalonez} at 40552) (secure). W._Curtis Chalonex for daénet_ A. Ecklund) FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
13-00000 MEMORANDUM August 4, 1997 TO: File CC: Jeremy Gunn Michelle Combs . David Marwell FROM: Doug Horne SUBJECT: ARRB Interview of Homer McMahon 1. On July 14, 1997 ARRB staff interviewed Mr. Homer McMahon, former director of. the color photography lab at the National Photographic Interpretation’Centey. ~~ ~~ - 2. During our tape-recorded interview, he used a code-word for a location/technical site which he indicated may have been “off-limits,” i.e., still-classified information. 3. Today, Michelle Combs informed me that she had just had a conversation with Mr. J. Barry Harrelson of the CIA’s HRG, who informed her that the code-word mentioned during ARRB’s interview of Mr. McMahon is still classified Top Secret/SCI, and that . our audiotape of the interview must be marked accordingly and Placed into SCI storage. 4, The purpose of this memo is to accompany the audiotape, which is today being placed into our SCI safe in the ARRB SCIF. 5. The code-word mentioned on the tape was not used in my meeting report which summarized the results of the interview. Horne e:\wp-docs\McMah.wpd File: 4.0.5 (Homer McMahon Interview)
13-00000 MEMORANDUM FOR: FROM: OFFICE: SUBJECT: REFERENCE: Barry, _"_ SOR OFFICIAL-USE ONLY 8 September 1997 J. Barry Harrelson (Teresa Wilcox, @ DST ODDS&TIRO ARRB interview of Homer McMahon 12-page fax dtd 27 Aug 97 | have reviewed the ARRB notes and have identified no classified material in them. | will arrange a time with youle later this week to listen to the audiotape. Thanks. Ce: Sent on 8 September 1997 at 03:32:18 PM FOR BFFIGIAE USE ONLY
13-00000 st , * SECRET CL BY:/2085904 €L REASOM: Section 1.5, @ pect ow: X1 pay Fam: COL 6-82 24 September 1997 MEMORANDUM FOR: — J. Barry Harrelson FROM: (Teresa Wilcox)@ DST OFFICE: ODDS&T/IRG SUBJECT: ~ (U) Review of Homer McMahon interview tape REFERENCE: Barry, (8) Based on my review of the audiotape today, | have determined that the tape is classified S BYE. As we discussed, please delete the name of the iim processing facility from the tape before the tape is released. The name is mentioned at the very end of the tape's side "A." [recommend that the reference to Camp Pe Peary also be deleted; however, this is also a DO and DA equity. FYI, Mr. McMahon does not directly link the facility to CIA; he e Says he was an Army brat, and that he used to do shooting at; Camp Péary. However, | feel — pemmnon Fy uncomfortable raising the profile of; Camp Peary, in a public release, even if the facility is not directly identified as a CiA location. Also, the mention of Camp Pearyis irrelevant to the point Mr. McMahon is trying to make. He mentions his experience with firearms in order to lay the foundation for his knowledge of how rounds travel when shot from firearms. Where he learned to shoot, as an Army brat or otherwise, is not relevant, in my view. CC: Sent on 24 September 1997 at 04:13:35 PM SECRET
13-00000 Ne Cra TR-2AS Assassination Records Review Board 600 E Street NW - 2nd Floor « Washington, DC 20530 (202) 724-0088 + Fax: (202) 724-0457 CIA HAS NC ORJECTION To pecemb DECLASS} PANDIOR cember 18, 1997 RELEASE | ue : (NFORMATION IN THIS DCC : Mr. John Pereira JENT Chief Historical Review Group Center for the Study of Intelligence Central Intelligence Agency Washington, D.C. 02505 Re: Status of CIA Responses to Assassination Records Review Board’s Requests for Additional Information and Records Dear John: I am writing to follow-up on our telephone call earlier today and to convey my serious concern about the status of CIA’s responses to the Review Board’s requests for " additional information and records. Although CIA has completed its responses to several requests, and many others have been answered in part, a significant number of requests have not been answered — including some that were made more than two years ago. On many occasions we have been assured that responses would be forthcoming, only to have promised dates come and go without answers. Itismow ~~ extremely important that these requests be answered promptly so that we may conduct a proper follow-up if necessary. The issues that we can now identify as being of the highest priority are identified in the text below by double asterisks (**)' and we request that they be answered within the next month. We request that the remaining requests be answered by April 1, 1998. The remainder of this letter is divided into two parts: first, a listing of the formal requests for information and records, and second, a listing of the informal requests for information and records. Please let me know if your understanding of any of the following points differs from ours so that we can resolve any potential discrepancies. ‘As identified more fully below, the issues are: CLA-1 Organizational Material, CIA-6 Cables and Dispatches, CIA-13 Backchannel Communications, CIA-IR-03 HTLINGUAL Documents, CIA-IR-04 Disposition of Angleton Files, CLA-IR-07 Claude Barnes Capehart, CLA-IR-15 Electronic “take” from Mexico City, CIA-IR-21 DRE Monthly Operational Reports, CIA-IR-22 “A” Files on Clay Shaw and Jim Garrison. Boaro Memeens: John A. Tunheim. Chair - Heary F. Graff + Kermit 4. Hall « Wilf’am L. Joyce « Anna K. Nelson
13-00000 Mr. John Pereira December 18, 1997 Page 12 **CIA-IR-22 “A” File on Clay Shaw and Jim Garrison. In July 1997, the ARRB staff-was shown an “A” file on Clay Shaw which pre- dated a 201 file. We were also told that an “A” file on Jim Garrison also existed. The Shaw file was declared to be an assassination record and it was our understanding that both files were to be sent to HRG for processing. We have not yet received confirmation from HRG that the files are in process as assassination records. CIA-IR-23 Watch Committee Files. In his memoirs, George Ball reports that upon first hearing of the shots in Dallas he called DCI John McCone and asked him to activate the Watch Committee. McCone replied that he already had. The Review Board requests the files of the Watch Committee for the period January 1963-May 1964. . CIA-TR-24° Defector File. The ARRB staff has identified documents on Lee Harvey Oswald from the Office of Security’s “Defector File.” It is our understanding that these documents are ‘now being processed as assassination records. No further tasking on this subject is anticipated. . CIA-IR-25 Zapruder Film. ' The Board has requested any and all records, not previously located in the . . Sequestered Collection, on any handling by the CIA of the Zapruder film. In particular, we are interested in any records of NPIC’s handling of the Zapruder film or copies of the Zapruder film in November and December 1963. Any log books or indexes which would indicate the individuals involved in the processing and handling of any assassination films should be inclyded in this request. . CIA-IR-26 Jordan James Pfuntner. The Review Board requested that a complete search for any records on this individual be undertaken, including a search of the Interagency Source Register The ARRB staff provided HRG with additional identification data on this individual. The Review Board seeks a full and accurate formal response to this
13-00000 | at ae _ | SECRET 2d. Searches conducted on OTS, OTC and cir O records used the following keywords: ° =, . surveil” oe — - oa Rs Russian oo USSR - Cuba* audio* electron” embassy Mexico* _ 8. CIAIR-16 U-2 Files. As stated in the memorandum, the Board was provided with a revised U-2 shelflist. Unless, specific keywords are requested, | will consider this action closed. 4. CIA-IR-17 DS&T Records on Castro Assassination Plots - Closed per Board memo. ql apruder Film - As previously reported, a search was conducted on 1 the terms: OBE IF RK, Commission, and 1963. Hits.on year 1963 did not reveal any pertinent information to ZAPR the request. ‘Lam, therefore, requesting th that this action be closed. 7. CIA-IR-33 FBIS-USR-92-112 Final response submitied for review to DS&T on 20 March | 1997. Concur in the response. &. in summary | have addressed ail the Board actions relevant to DS&T. Based on the comments associated with each item, DS&T's actions are all closed. If you have any questions, please ; contact me on secure 76297, ADMIN-IUO when separated from attachments NOTE: Documents will sent through the mail. " Sent on 23 March 1998 at 12:00:07 PM cc: Sent on 23 March 1998 at 16,19,14 " SECRET -
13-00000 SECRET . 24 March 1998 MEMORANDUM FOR: _ J. Barry Harrelson C /, Al _ Le 2 tT FROM: Marsha AHubbs _. . DS&T Information Management Officer OFFICE: . O/DS&T SUBJECT: JFK Records REFERENCE: ARRB Memo dtd 5 March 1998 1. This memorandum is in response to the following JFK action items relevant to DS&T as contained in the Assassination Records Review Board memorandum addressed to J. Barry Harrelson and dated 5 March 1998. _ 2a. in conducting a search for thi above information, a file from(OTS: ‘(Offi ce of f 7 ‘ Technical Service) surfaced with the a ier title "Mexico City, Mexico." The attached been included. It is an audio tape in Boanish of the SRT-9R transmitter/switch receiver that was placed in an office at the Cugan Embassy at Mexico City. The conversation. (poor quality) was between a man ai@ woman who are just talking about office procedures. No substantive informagion was exchanged between the two of them: ! CL BY: 0524507 ! CL Reason: 1.5c Decl On: X1 Drv From:Multiple Sources SECRET
13-00000 ' SECRET since the Division D records | were fe C six Records Retirement Requests Ww Additionally, | have called the Recore are as follows: ed intitally i in the DO system. . a] have attached.” Fpse job numbers relfect the‘ years 1959-1: 962. ° 7 Center to geta status of those > jobs today. : a 4. 61-S-17 B rour boxes transferred to F/D (DDO), - March hree boxes destroyed 71980 per Records Center records °. Destroyed per Records Center records | 6. 6 86R “Transferred to OSO > (OSB) 197 pe, These w were s the only ' that are. in the timeframe r SECRET
13-00000 SECRET —> . §, CIA-IR-25 Zapruder Film - As previously reported, a search was conducted on the terms: ZAPRUDER, JFK, and 1963. Hits on year 1963 did not reveal any ' pertinent information to the request. | am, therefore, requesting that this action be closed. GIA AR-07 Claude Barnes Capehart. Closed per Board memo. On. FBIS-USR-92-112 Final response submitted for review to DS&T on arch 1997. Concur in the response. _ 8. In summary | have addressed all the Board actions relevant to DS&T. Based on the comments associated with each item, DS&T's actions are all closed. If you have any questions, please contact me on secure_76297. : 7 _ SECRET
13-00000 49 July 1998 MEMORANDUM FOR: Laura Denk, Esq. Executive Director, ARRB FROM: J. Barry Harrelson Senior Reviewer, HRP SUBJECT: ARRB Request No. CIA-IR-25, Bill 1. The following is responsive to subject request. 2. Considerable information has been provided and reviewed by ARRB staff members concerning the Agency’s involvement with the so-called “Zapruder film.” It is our understanding that all questions relating to this subject have been answered previously except for the possible existence of NPIC log books and the identity of one, “Bill 3. The Agency has conducted a search of its records for the NPIC log books and a Bill or William (Green) who may have worked at NPIC or in another capacity which would have caused him to deal with the Zapruder film. The results of that search were negative. 4. If you require anything further in this regard, please advise. J. Barry Harkel son ,
13-00000 oo ip 29 July 1998 ExeGutive Director; ARRB ts . a ouyye 4 FROM: ..... .. d. Barry Harrelson Se BEE ES ae Senior Reviewer, HRP E , oe SUBJECT: . ARRB Request No. CIA-IR-25, Bill . ~ (William) ( Green, and the Zapruder Film 1. The following is responsive to subject request. 2. Considerable information has been provided and reviewed by ARRB staff members concerning the Agency’s involvement with ‘the so-called “Zapruder film.” It is our understanding that all questions relating to this subject have been answered previously except for the possible (Green: of NPIC log books and the identity of one, *Bill reen.} 3. The Agency has conducted a search of its records for the NPIC log books and a Bill or William Green who may have worked at NPIC or in another capacity ‘which “would have caused him to deal with the Zapruder film. The results of that search were negative. 4. If you require anything further in this regard, please advise. J. Barry Harrelson Dser | EeVo \Nae S Guteau ( om Awe Wingy Na Pies. oa Yk