Classification: (This form is to be used for material extracted i from ClA—controlled documents.) been recruited as a CIA agent when he was in Japan.  / ; These persons expressed the Opinion that, had Oswald been { recruited without their knowledge, it would have been a rare exception contrary to the working policy and guidelines of ( (3 3. Lee Harvey Oswald's CIA File The CIA has long acknowledged that, prior to the President's assassination, it had a personality file on Lee Harvey Oswald? This file, which in Agency terminology is referred to as a 201 file, was opened on December 9, 1960. The Agency has explained to the Committee that 201 files are opened when a person is considered to be of potential intelligence or counterintelligence significance. The opening of such a file is designed to sérve the purpose of bringing all of the CIA's information pertaining to that f Classification: a | Classified by derivation:
LS £7 LF FF TF ZT *« Classification: (This form is to be used for material extracted from ClA—controlled documents.) individual into one centralized records system belonging to the Deputy Directorate for Operations, that component of the Agency responsible for clandestine activities. The existence of a 201 file does not necessarily connote any actual relationship or contact with the CIA. For example, the Oswald file was purportedly opened because he was considered to be a potential counterintelligence threat. Oswald's file contained absolutely no indication that ( he had ever had any relationship with the CIA. Nevertheless, because the Committee was aware of at least one instance (in an unrelated case) where an Agency officer had apparently contemplated the use of faked files with forged documents, _/ + special attention was given to procedural questions that were occasioned by this file review. Classification: | Classified by derivation:
Classification: (This form is to be used for material extracted from ClA—controlled documents.) a) Why was Oswald's 201 file opened _on December 9, 1960, more than a year after his attempt to defect to the Soviet Union? A confidential State Department telegram dated October 31, 1959, which was sent from Moscow to the CIA, reported that Lee Harvey Oswald, a recently discharged to renounce his American citizenship and “has offered Soviets any information he has acquired as /an/ enlisted radar operator." _/ At least three other communications of a confidential nature which gave more detail on the Oswald case were apparently* sent to the CIA during the same z Pwo of these documents, Warren Commission Exhibits 917 and 918, contained routing notations indicating that they had been sent to the CIA, but the documents themselves were never found in Oswald's file. Classification: marine, had appeared at the United States Moscow embassy f | Classified by derivation:
SE AP EE A ES SS EP EE EE Classification: (This form is to be used for material extracted from ClA—controlled documents.) approximate time period. _/ Agency officials questioned by the Committee have testified that the substance of the October 31, 1959 cable was sufficiently important to warrant the opening of a 201 file. In fact, however, Oswald's file was not opened until December 9, 1960. The CIA was requested by the Committee to indicate where documents pertaining to Oswald had been disseminated internally and stored prior to the opening of his 201 file. In response, the Agency advised the Committee that because document dissemination records of low national security are no longer in existence for the years 1959-1963.  / Consequently, the Agency was unable to explain either when _these documents had been received or by which component. Classification: significance are retained for only a five-year period, they ¢ | Classified by derivation: mam Me ee eT
Classification: (This form is to be used for material extracted from CiA—controlied documents.) An Agency memorandum, dated September 18, 1975, indicates that Oswald's file was opened on December 9, 1960 by virtue of the receipt of five documents: two from the FBI, two from the State Department, and one from the Navy. _/ This reasoning, however, is inconsistent with the presence in Oswald's file of four State Department documents dated in 1959 and a fifth dated May 25, 1960. It is, of course, possible that the September 18, 1975 memorandum is referring Deputy Directorate for Operations to State Department documents that were received by the/ - in October and November of 1960 and that the earlier State Department communications had been received by the CIA's Deputy Directorate for Operations. Office of Security but not the/ In the absence of dissemination records, however, the issue cannot be resolved on this basis. The September 18, 1975 memorandum also states that Classification: | Classified by derivation: “ JS
Classification: - (This form is to be used for material extracted from ClA-——controlled documents.) Oswald's file was opened on December 9, 1960 as a result of his "'defection' to the USSR on 10/31/59 and renewed interest in Oswald brought about by his queries concerning possible reentry into the United States."  / There is no indication, to any United States government official however, that Oswald expressed/any intention of returning until mid-February of 1961. Finally, reference to the original form that was used to start a file on Oswald does not resolve this issue because the appropriate slot which would normally indicate the "source document" that initiated the action makes reference to an Agency component rather than to a dated document. The Committee was able to determine the basis for the and then deposing the Agency employee who was directly responsible for initiating the opening action. This individual Classification: s opening of Oswald's file on December 9, 1960 by interviewing ( | Classified by derivation: MM LF LI LE LE LF Le a Dn
LP LT LF 2 FF LT ~ Classification: (This form is to be used for material extracted from ClA—controlled documents.) explained that the CIA had received a request from the State Department for information concerning American defectors. After compiling the requested information, she responded to the inquiry and then opened a 201 file on each defector involved. _/f a This statement was corroborated by review of/State letter Department/which indicated that such a request, in fact, had been made of the CIA on October 25, 1960. Attached to the f cn ° State Depart ment letter was a list of known defectors; Lee Harvey Oswald's name was on that list. _f/ The CIA responded to this request on November 21, 1960 by providing the requested information and adding two names to the \ ' State Department's original list. : Significantly, the Committee réviewed the files of eleven individuals on the original State Department list , Classification: === [ | Classified by derivation: Oe a eee ee ae
Classification: (This form is to be used for material extracted from ClA—controlled documents.) and determined that the files for each of the five (including Oswald) who did not have Agency (201) files prior to the receipt of the State Department inquiry were opened in a =. “EA. “A December 1960. In each case, the slot for “source document" made reference to the same Agency component rather than to a dated document. Even so, this analysis only explains why a file on Oswald was finally opened; standing alone it does not explain the seemingly long delay in the opening of the file. To determine whether such a delayed opening was necessarily unusual, the Committee reviewed the files of 13 of the 14 persons on the CIA's November 21, 1960 response to the State \ Department and of 16 other defectors (from an original list of 380) who were American born, had defected during the years 1958-1963, and who had returned to the United States Classification: f | Classified by derivation: _ a ~ SF I LT |
i ee a ae a anne Classification: (This form is to be used for material extracted from ClA—controlled documents.) during that same time period. Of 29 files that were reviewed, eight individuals had been the subject of 201 files prior to the time of their defection. In only four of the remaining twenty-one cases were 201 files opened at the time of defection. The files on the 17 other defectors were opened from four months to several years after the time of defection. At the very least, this file review indicated that during 1958-63 the opening of a file years after a defection cccurred, was not at all uncommon. In many cases the opening was triggered by.some event, independent of the defection, which drew attention to the individual involved. b) Why was Lee Harvey Oswald's 201 file opened under the name Lee Henry Oswald? Lee Harvey Oswald's 201 file was mistakenly opened under the name Lee Henry Oswald. No Agency witness was able Classification: F | Classified by derivation:
Classification: | (This form is to be used for material extracted from ClA—controlled documents.) specifically to explain how this mistake was made. All Agency personnel, however, including the person who initiated the file opening, testified that this must have been occasioned innocently by bureaucratic error. Moreover, the Committee ' received substantial testimony to the effect that this error would not have prevented Oswald's name from being elicited from the CIA's filing system during a routine name trace done under the name Lee Henry Oswald. c) What do the letters "AG," which are written in the opening form, connote? for Lee Harvey Oswald containsthe designation AG in a box marked "Other Identification." Because this term was considered to be of potential significance in resolving the issue of Oswald's alleged Agency relationship, the CIA was asked to Classification: ___ The form used to initiate the opening of a 201 file ( | Classified by derivation:
Classification: (This form is to be used for material extracted from ClA—controlled documents.) explain its meaning. The Agency's response indicated that "AG" is the OI ("Other Identification") code meaning "actual or potential defectors to the East or the SINO/SOVIET Bloc including Cuba," and that anyone so described could have the OT code “AG." This code was reportedly added to Oswald's opening form because of the comment on the form that he had defected to the Soviet Union in 1959. : An Agency official who was a DDO records expert and for many years had been involved in the CIA's investigative efforts concerning the John F. Kennedy assassination, gave the Committee a somewhat different explanation of the circumstances surrounding the term "AG" and its placement on Oswald's opening form. This individual. testified that "AG" listings of occupational groupings or intelligence affiliations: was an example of a code used to aid in preparing computer ; Classification: f | Classified by derivation:
ae Ma Al y , A y 4 4 4 semen » Classification: | (This form is to be used for material extracted from ClA—controlled documents.) He explained that these codes always utilized two letters and that in this case, the first letter "A" must have revrecented Communism, while the second letter would represent some category within the Communist structure. His recollection was that at the time of the assassination the "AG" code was not yet in existence because there were no provisions then in effect within the Agency for the indexing of American defectors. He recalled that it was only during the life of the Warren Commission that the CIA realized that its records system lacked provisions for indexing an individual such as Oswald. Consequently, the CIA then revised its records handbook to include authorization for indexing American defectors and established a code for its computer system to be used for the category of “American defectors." Although this individual did not know when the Classification: | Classified by derivation:
Classification: (This form is to be used for material extracted ; 6 from ClA—controlled documents.) notation "AG" was added to Oswald's opening sheet, he presumed that it would have to have been following the addition of the American defector code, thus placing the time somewhere in the middle of the Warren Commission's investigation. He explained that it was difficult to determine when any of the notations on the opening sheet were made, since it was standard procedure to update the forms whenever necessary so that they were as reflective as possible of the available information. Finally. this individual testified that the regulations regarding the use of this occupation and intelligence code specifically prohibited indicating that a particular person was either an employee of the Agency or someone who was used \ by the Agency. _/ This prohibition was designed to prevent anyone from being able to produce any~“kind of categorical listing of CIA employees, contacts, or connections.  / Classification: | | Classified by derivation: 0
Classification: (This form is to be used for material extracted from ClA—controlled documents.) d) Why does the opening form for Lee Harvey Oswald's 201 file indicate that the file was to be restricted? The form that was used to initiate the opening of Lee Harvey Oswald's 201 file. contains a notation indicating. that the file was to be “restricted." This indication was considered potentially significant because of the CIA's practice of restricting agents' files to persons on a “need to know" basis. Co snvoatiganson however, revealed that restricting access to a file was not necessarily indicative of any relation- ship with the CIA. The individual who actually placed the restriction on Oswald's file testified that this was done simply to allow her to remain aware of any developments that might have occurred with regard to the file. This purpose was achieved because any pergon seeking access to the file first had to assification: : | Classified by derivation: 1 sa of fe he
Classification: (This: form is to be used for material extracted from ClA—controlled documents.) notify the restricting officer; at that time the restricting officer could be apprised of any developments possibly necessitating access to the file by someone else. This testimony was confirmed by a CIA records expert who further testified that, had the file been permanently cha ged as well as restricted, the possibility of a relationship with the CIA would have been greater. There was no indication on Oswald's form that it had been placed on permanent cha ge. Finally, the Committee reviewed the files of four other defectors which had been opened at the same time and by the same person as Oswald's, and determined that each of their files had similarly been restricted. Each of these other % individuals - on the list of defectors that had been exchanged by the CIA and State Department. None of the files pertaining to these other defectors had any evidence suggestive Classification:. } ' | Classified by derivation: ee ye le fe fe fe
Classification: (This form is to be used for material extracted from ClA—controlled documents.) of a possible intelligence agency association. e) Were 37 documents missing from Lee Harvey Oswald's "201 file? In the course of reviewing Lee Harvey Oswald's 201 file, the Committee discovered an unsigned memorandum to the Chief of Counterintelligence, Research and Analysis, dated 20 February 1964, which stated that 37 documents were missing from Oswald's 201 file. According to the memorandum, this statement was based upon a comparison of a machine listing of documents officially recorded as being in the 201 file and those documents actually physically available in the file. While the memorandum mentioned that such a machine listing was attached, no such attachment was found in the 201 file at the time of the Committee's review. @he memorandum itself bears the classification "SECRET EYES ONLY," and is one of the Classification: 2a. EEE. [aa =z. PN =. Sa be UN <SE. GA. BN | Classified by derivation: La I I I a a
SE EF EE SF SE SE GS a ame Classification: (This form is to be used for material extracted from ClA—controlled documents.) documents that had been fully withheid from release under the Freedom of Information review. In response to a Committee inquiry, the CIA advised that because Oswald's file was so active during the course of the Warren Commission investigation, up-to-date machine listings were produced periodically. On this basis, the Agency stated that “it must be assumed that whoever was responsible for maintaining the Oswald file brought thie file up-to-date by locating the 37 documents and placing them in the file." Because this response was incomplete, the author of this memorandum was deposed. He testified that once a document had been registered into a 201 file by the Agency's computer system, physical placement of the document in the file was not always necessary. On this basis, he explained fa that the items listed in the memorandum were not missing but Classification: | Classified by derivation: 0 aN MT 47 LF &F LY 2
Classification: (This form is to be used for material extracted from CliA—controlled documents.) rather had either been routinely placed in a separate file because of their sensitivity or were being held by other individuals who needed them for analytical purposes. He further stated that in the course of his custodianship of Oswald's file, he had requested perhaps as many as 100 computer listings on the contents of the Oswald file. While there had been many instances in which one or more documents had been charged out to someone, he stated that he had never discovered that any documents were actually missing. According to his testimony, the 37 documents, in fact, were available, but simply were not located in the file at that time. f) Was there any evidence that the CIA had for some reason maintained a dual filing system regarding Lee. Harvey Oswald? Although the Committee was aware from its outset of Classification: the possibility that a dual filing system -- using one : | Classified by derivation:
Classification: (This form is to be used for material extracted from ClA—controlled documents.) ostensibly innocuous file and one which contained the actual operational detail indicative of an Agency relationship with the CIA -- could be utilized to disguise the existence of an actual relationship between an individual and the CIA, this awareness heightened into a concern with the discovery of certain files which indicated that at least two Agency documents to protect the purpose of the ZR Rifle project officers had contemplated the use of fake files and forged ( from being disclosed. The ZR Rifle project was an executive action (i.e., assassination) program which bore no relation to the Oswald case. Richard Helms testified that the assassinations aspect of this project was never implemented and, in fact, was discontinued as soon as it was brought to his attention, _/ but the implications of this discovery in terms of the potentiality for a faked Oswald file were troubling. Classification: | Classified by derivation: Ca yh |
Classification: (This form is to be used for material extracted from ClA—controlled documents.) In the Oswald case, there were two items which received scrutiny because they were potentially indicative of a dual filing system. The first involved .a photograph of him that had been taken in Minsk in 1961 and the second concerned a copy of a letter that had been written to him by his mother during his stay in the Soviet Union. At the time’ of President Kennedy's assassination, both of these items were in the CIA's possession but neither was in Oswald's 201 file. The photograph of Oswald taken in Minsk shows him posing with several other people. According to the CIA, the picture was found after the assassination as a result of a search of the Agency's graphics files for materials potentially \ relevant to Oswald's stay in the Soviet Union. _/ The ; Agency advised that this photograph, as well as several ¢ others not related to Oswald, were routinely obtained in Classification: _ ; f | Classified by derivation:
Classification: (This form is to be used for material extracted from ClA—controlled documents.) 1962 from some tourists by the CIA's Domestic Contacts Division, a component that frequently sought information on a nonclandestine basis from Americans traveling abroad in a “aA “A GA Communist countries. Committee interviews with the tourists in question confirmed that the photograph, along with 159 other photographic slides, had been made routinely available to the Agency's Domestic Contacts Division. Neither tourist had heard of Lee Harvey Oswald prior to the assassination or even knew which photographs had been of interest to the Agency. CIA records indicate_that only five of the 160 slides initially made available were retained. _/ Committee interviews with the two CIA employees who had handled the slides for the Domestic Contacts Division established that Oswald had not been identified at the time that these Classification: | Classified by derivation: