: 157-10014-10132 JFK Assassination System Date: 7/7/2015 Identification Form Agency Information AGENCY:  SSCIA RECORD NUMBER: 157-10014-10132 RECORD SERIES: MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS OF THE CHURCH COMMITTTEE { | | AGENCY FILENUMBER: —07-M-38 | i Document Information ORIGINATOR:  SSCIA FROM: TO; TITLE : | DATE: 03/24/1976 PAGES: 28 SUBJECTS : ne SSCSGO, METHODOLOGY, . | COMMITTEE BUSINESS | DOCUMENT TYPE: TRANSCRIPT CLASSIFICATION: Declassified bod RESTRICTIONS: 1B; 1C boot CURRENT STATUS: — Redact DATE OF LASTREVIEW: — 03/22/2000 OPENING CRITERIA : COMMENTS : CCBOX 324 AL v9.1 WW 50955 Boctld:32423520 Page 1
4 Date 08/07/95 Page : 1 JFK ASSASSINATION SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION FORM AGENCY! INFORMATION AGENCY : SSCIA oe RECORD NUMBER : 157-10014-10132 | RECORDS SERIES : MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS OF THE CHURCH COMMITTTEE AGENCY FILE NUMBER : DOCUMENT INFORMATION ORIGINATOR : SSCIA FROM : TO ; TITLE : DATE : 03/24/76 PAGES : 28 SUBJECTS : SSCSGO, METHODOLOGY COMMITTEE BUSINESS DOCUMENT TYPE : TRANSCRIPT a CLASSIFICATION : TOP SECRET i RESTRICTIONS : REFERRED : CURRENT STATUS : POSTPONED IN FULL, DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 01/05/99 OPENING CRITERIA ; COMMENTS : CCBOX 324 a (R] ~ ITEM IS RESTRICTED r HY 50955 DBoctd: 32742935270 Page 2?
Nowin held | before ‘Senate Select committee to: Study: Governmental operations with Respect to. ‘Intelligence: “Ketivities: po Lo my s i { | i ‘ Wednesday, arch: 24 19768 Weshingwo, D.. c. 7 | - " (Stenotype Tape’ and. Waste: ‘turned: -over™ ~ to. the Committee for. destruction). - oe po ae : ; ; WARD & PAUL : a . no - 410 FIRST STREET, S: Be. “One : WASHINGTON, D: G; 20008: : (202) 544-6000-. I i TOP SECRET HW 50955 Docld: 32423520 Page 3 hes ee Te a ab Tie kates dsl
WARD/smnl | . . | 1 1 SO ss COMMITTEE MEETING 30 , ‘Wednesday, March 24, 1976 4 --- aU | oe, oe 5 “y United States Senate, 6 i. —— | Select Committee to Study Governmental ” SG oe «Operations with Respect to 8 po . Intelligence Activities, 9 oo i . , ‘Washington, D.C. 10 | The Committee met} pursuant to notice, at 2:23 o'clock _ ll }p.m., in Room S-407, the Capitol, the Honorable John Towe 12 | (vice Chairman) presiding. 13 |. Present: Senators Tower (presiding), Huddleston, Mondale,. 14 || Baker, Mathias and Schweiker. . : i: iy? po: 15 Also present: William G. Miller, Staff Director; and 16. William Bader, Charles! q 17 ||Culbreath, Elliot Maxwell, . i Kirbow, Joseph diGenova, Elizabeth. Charles Lombard, Rick Inder furth, ao : a 18 ||Michael Madigan, Al. Quanbeck, Ted Rolston, David Aaron and - po , ‘19 || Robert Kelley, Professional Staff Members. { 20 || | | 2 21 i 22 |) ni ook 24 | TOP SECRET _ HW 50955 Doclda:384293520 Page 4 | {0 WARD BR PAUL
nD Senator Tower. Why don't we go ahead. and proceed without yoy “ER 4 -* tpl a quorum. If anybody wants to raise a point of order later, let 4 ||them'do that. _ 5 Mr. Aaron. All right. 6 | Page 110, Section vars is the section on oversight and the 7 | intelligence budget. rt contains ‘both an analysis of some of 8 ithe constitutional questions involved in disclosure of intelli- 9 ||gence expenditures, as well as the Committee's analysis or ; | ~ 10 | the staff's analysis of; the particular issue of disclosure 11 land its relationship to our national security concerns. 12 Two numbers appear; in the text that the Committee should 13 | direct its attention to. The most important functioning number 14 is the $4.7 billion which the Committee's- analysis would ‘15 |attribute to the direct! costs of national intelligence. That | bo o 16 | is the number which the, findings and recommendations propose ; 4 | ; 17 | be made public and be made public annually. rai The second number is a $10 billion figure, which is the” “19 || overall global costs ofan intelligence, : based upon the 20 | analysis of the. Committee staff, essentially Mr. Quanbeck. This 21 includes not only the $4.7 billion of national intelligence, but 22 fit includes tactical intelligence and it includes what I think i 1 j 23 you have to call indirect costs of the intelligence establishmen 24 For example, the fact that intelligence officers in the military] 25 ||. g0 through certain training programs and have. certain medical Top SECRET . . : WARD & PAUL HY 50955 DBocld: 32423570 Page 5
HW 450955 10 11 _ le 13 14 15 - u7 18 19 20 al ee 25 24 25 ‘Docld: 32423520 Page 6 won RPALH, -go to the question of ‘the’ numbers to begin with, whether they | should be indicated in the text, and then the recommendations, TOP SECRET 7 3 | ‘ facilities and so forth and so on, these costs are not costs in the sense that they/are exclusively devoted to intelligence. I mean, if we were, .for example, to have no intelligence, that doesn't mean you would] save that entire $10 billion. These are in effect, I think those who. worked on the defense budget: before are aware of what indirect costs are and how one calculates them. | Those essentially| are the two numbers. | There is, of cours ‘ a dispute about whether it is necessary or desirable to- reveal the numbers, and I might just say in that connection, the primary reason for” giving the global figure is in part to. settle a lot of public| debate about these enormous costs of: intelligence in a manner which will make it clear what it is one has been talking about, and that in fact a lot of these are indirect costs, a ‘lot of these are tactical and integral — to the normal functioning of military commands. ‘| ‘The recommendations start on page 114, and there are only three of them. [I think the decision of the Committee has to the first of which: being that there be a national intelligence “4 budget, that it. be made public, that the figure, the global figure for the nationall intelligence budget, which would be . |: the ‘4.7 billion, be rade: public, and that the Committee - recommend ‘further that) the oversight committee consider whether To» SECRET
HW 50955 10 “ill 12 ~13 14 15 “16 uy 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 29 BDoclda: 324273520 Page 7 TOP SECRET 7 ‘ 1. j We : it is necessary, given|the requirement of the Constitution and { Ju ‘so’ forth, to publish more details. - ' hoe 4 I must say the latter point raises a textual question which we have to look at, and’ that is the way one describes what revealing the national intelligence number woulddo in terms of the constitutional requirements. What we have suggested here is on page 112 there are, I think, some points of view which say that revealing that number ‘is not sufficient to satisfy the Constitution. There is. another point of view which Says that the national security is overriding and that this number should not be disclosed at t it ‘ al all, and therefore even not disclosing any numbers still satisfies the Constitution, What we have “Ty to capture in the first sentence Hp of the full paragraph on ‘Page 112 is what the Subcommittee, I believe, felt was just labout the right | balance between the | requirements of national security and the requirements. of the Constitution. a It reads, “The Conmittes believes that disclosure of an aggregate figure for national intelligence is as far as: it is prudent to go at this stage in reconciling the nation's constitutional and national security requirements. Senator Tower. ALL right. Shall we take this page by page now and see what -- b Senator Huddleston. . I would” suggest that we go on the To» SECRET WARD & PAUL
i | TOP SECRET _~E_ uh . | three recommendations, Mr. Chairman... Senator Tower. Take the recommendations? All right... First, let me just ask if there is any substantial disagree ment with anything in the text here. I think it has got _ | probably as good = balance vas you can on this figure, given the aggregate figure. Well, you don't have line’ items on’ the figure in that anyway. | : Senator Huddleston. Probably not. We hassled over it pretty much, and I will say this: the staff that did the work on the budget did an outstanding job, so I think we had a better look at the budget of intelligence than anybody has had. | j Senator Tower. Well, I'll bet there is nobody around here ‘that can challenge the | figures, | | Senator Huddleston. : That is right, even the Administration]. I think it is reasonable. of course, we will have a question on the numbers that we have included maybe in the text, as far as the agency’ is concerned in sanitization, but I think our recommendation to include an aggregate figure is sound, plus further consideration be given to the constitutional] requirements. o | Senator Tower. Any objection, then, to. the text, pages 110 through 113. | | ud Senator Baker. I} have no objection, Mr. Chairman. ~Senator Tower. All right. TOP SECRET WARD & PAUL HY 50955 Doctd:3242735270 Page 6
10 © 1 12 13 14 16 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 £0 HW 50955 ‘well. Bocld: Dee, do you want to address yourself to the recommenda~ tions? Senator Huddleston. total which would corréspond to that $4.7 billion figure be included in the budget thereby it would be made, of course, public, and that the oversight committee consider further whether it would be neces~ sary in order to fulfill the requirements of the Constitution to go further than that. there. The monitoring, that [is just an oversight responsibility, it seems to me, No. And then the GAO "por time anyway. senator Tower. Is inherent makes its recommendations, ‘they come in with a national £igure? Mr. Miller. Senator Tower, budget, they present a Senator Huddleston. that. Mr. Miller. The In the presentation that the people from the CIA gave ‘to TOP SECRET 423520 Page 9 TOP SECRET - The main thing is that we recommend that an aggregate Well, in this This committee? No, ‘f *t Bt S z think David explained ‘them pretty : it cago er that is presented to Congress, and i | let me ask you this. No. i the suggestion that when OMB OMB, when they present the annual pat onal ~— | Under our plan, the bet would do | i ia i iDCI| lwould do that. WARD & PAUL |
TOP SECRET 1 ||this.Committee, they have the capacity to array ‘it ina way . Th 2 ||that would be useful col an! oversight committee, so the figure 5 $4.7 billion corresponds réally to their perception of what 4 ||national intelligence ils.| ae 5 The larger figure, the, $9.7 billion is based on further 6 |lwork done by this Commilttee. They dispute some of the items on . 7 |but. not the basic approach) 8 . Mr. Aaron. AS you know, the new executive order, the 9 Director of Central Intel Ligence will be presenting ‘to the { i { 10 | President a consolidated pptional intelligence budget, and he il will in fact be preparing ¢ Cat budget. In effect we are’ 12 recommending that it be oo to the Congress. Earlier | 13 || there are recommendatigns| long those lines, that that budget 14 ||. be presented to. the congress. | 15 _ This would say, in ef ul 16 the breakdown, be made pappic. fect, that that global figure, not 17 Mr. Quanbeck. . I phil it would be important that the ‘18 Congress, together with the executive branch, define exactly 19 || what goes in that national. intelligence budget.. There really 20 | is no agreement at this time. e1 Senator Tower. Any further comment on the recommendations?| | ; | One question. When we talk about i } i | i iM Cc 22 Senator Schweiker, a | | Ly, which of these figures are we 23 | releasing a figure publi : : ‘h 24 || talking about? 25 Mr. Aaron. It would pe the $4.7 billion, down to the first Top SECRET : WARD & PAUL MW 50955 Doacld: 32429520 ° Page 10
HW 50955 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 vy 18 19 20 eal 22 25 24° 25° Boclda: 324273520 Page il TOP SECRET ; subtotal, national intelligence effort. Mr. Quanbeck. We also propose to release the $9. 7 billion to show some relationship. to what the House has already released. They released a figure of $10.5 billion. Mr. Kirbow.. I think the Senator's question went to in the future, annually. | Mr. Quanbeck. Yes, that would be the $4.7 billion. | Senator Huddleston. I don't know whether we ought to change that figure from $10 billion to $9.7 billion. Me. Aaron. I think we ought to use the same figure all the way through. | | Mr. Kirbow. rT think ig you say: $10 billion and jump back to $9.7 billion -- if you just say approximately elt billion. Senator Schweiker. What is the reason of the Subcommittee | in releasing the $4.7 billion as opposed to the $9.7 billion? Senator Huddleston. Well, $4.7 billion represents more of the direct costs of our national intelligence. You have got three different figures there. As you go up to $6.9 billion -you are picking up your tactical and military intelli- gence. Then when you pick up the next $2 billion or so there, that is support costs that while they are necessary for intelli- gence, they are not necessary just because of intelligence. You could probably s0| pm -- they would go on even if you eliminated all of your intelligence. | Senator Tower I think the first paragraph on 113 deals © TOP SECRET WARD & PAUL
10 1l 12 13 14 15 16 1? “18 19 20 el 235 24 £5 Fong NRSC NSINONE RR n—E——nnaS aaa SSeS Nana NAAN Pe Ora Eien aaa aN = : TOP SECRET _ . with that. Thus, the entire amount could not be saved if there. were no intelligence activities funded by it through the Defense Department. Senator Schweiker. Won't you conceal. more from the other side if you release the entire figure? I donit have any strong argument, but it just seems to me that one of your problems ils that if you give the indirect | figures you would confuse the enemy and you would still level with the public to a greater extent. oe { Senator Tower~ Well, pin told the Agency would rather q have the $4.7 billion figure. | Senator Huddleston. I think they like the national figure without getting into the tebtical. Senator Schweiker. okay, I don't feel strongly about it. | Senator Baker. I think Dick has got a good point, but I guess their preference in] this respect -- Senator Huddleston. Well, they don't want it to look too high, for one thing. | “Senator Baker. . Well, who knows what is too high? 4 i Senator Tower. You know, the critics have been saying we "are going to be spending syo billion. Senator Baker. Oh, that, they are going to stop and they'r going: to say we've been spending $4 billion in the same tone of ‘To? SECRET voice. HW 50955 Docld:32423520 Page 12 | WARD'& PAUL af
HW 50955 LO il 12 13 15 16 “17 18 19 20 el 22 25 24 25 Bocld: 32423520 Page i3 committee, it would be the |inumber that was authorized and ization bill. | oe ‘TOP SECRET Lo | . 4h . P| . Senator Tower. Well, /$10 billion is more powerful than. $4.7 billion because it is higher. Senator Baker. I knéw that and I knew that would’ be the answer. , Mr. Aaron. -.1I might say that there is also the consideratio that the $4.7 billion number, under our proposed oversight therefore presumably would|have to be made public in the author- neh I Senator Tower. Anything further on Section VIII? All right, Section 1x} Mr. Aaron. The next$ection deals with chemical and. biological agents and the intelligence community, and I might call on Elliot to » describe it because he did most of the work in this area, you recall. , We had a hearing on the subject of the toxins and what have you. We also had even more I think in-depth analysis of the whole problem of. drug testing as it existed in the CIA and to some extent in the military. Elliot? Mr. Maxwell. The section tries to deal with both the testing and the shift from defensive to offensive concerns as well as the problems involved in particularly the surreptitious administration of drugs col unwitting, non-volunteer human | ; | subjects. a All ‘the Senators are knowledgeable about the Olsen case. TO® SECRET WARD & PAUL
HY 50955 lo ll 12 13 14 15 16 as 18 19 20 el 22 25 24 29 Docld:3 493520, Page 14 OP SECRET = 2— ss In a‘ related matter, another person was killed as a result of a military intelligence tegting program conducted in New York. These were very highly sensitive programs that were begun in response to a concern by the Agency and the military that individuals in the American government or agents of the American government would be kidnapped or held by hostile powers and would have these drugs used against them either for interrogation purposes or to gain: control. a . They soon, however, became used as testing programs for 4 { our use of.chemical and biglogical ‘agents. These included not . _ only the toxins, but also testing of LSD, sodium pentathol among at 4 , . . . re ~ . , others. The problems involived were not only the concern over i the human rights of individual subjects,but the procedures - within the CIA, in this. case, in which internal CIA's concern over the security of the program led to the waiving of ‘certain administrative controls so that in 1957, for instance, a fi the Inspector General, doug a survey of the whole program, had no knowledge that there was this particular unwitting testing program going on. t | The Committee recommendations go to the question of waiver of Agency regulations, a oilobiem that we have had all the way. through whereby regulation’ are issued by the Director and thus can be waived at any time, and the Committee, or the ; Subcommittee recommendations would require that if there were. a. waiver of such regulations, | they be reported to the Committee TO® SECRET ( WARD & PAUL
“10 il 12 13 14 15° 16 17 end .1 18 19 20 21 22 23 ay 20 HW 50955 Docld:32423520 Page 15 ‘oo TOP SECRET y t 12 so that they would know. how, the internal governince of the agency has changed. ; Secondly, it deals with the establishment, or really, the continuation of a body presently in existence, the President's Commission for the Protect and Behavioral Research, wilich is drawing up standards for “3 a on of Human Subjects of Biomedical testing on human subjects within the government. There is a piece of legislation, S. 2515, introduced which 4 q would continue the life ofllthat ‘commission afd would provide the commission with jurisdiction over DOD and the CIA. The ; CIA and DOD have both expressed individually their agreement oo a | : oe with having their experimentation governed by. the standards of t this Commission. Finally, it indicates the Committee's hope that the i oo Director of Central Intelligence and the Secretary of Defense . od ti a . gta will continue the efforts’ they are making to’ find those people , who were subjects of the chsts and to make sure that they have proper medical treatment available if it is required. “| ee _ Senator Schweiker. Tijust wanted to say this recommendatio here coincides with what our health subcommittee is working on ‘and also with what the Domestic Subcommittee is coming up with.- td a So we do have a fairly unified and integrated -- . i Senator Tower. Any comment on this section? ne . Mr. diGenova. The only thing I would say in regard to the first recommendation would. be that one way of reading it is that TOP SECRET WARD R Palit. :
HY 0955 LO 11 12 13 14 - 15 16 1? 18 19 20 el 22, qe 24 29 Docld: | =9= SECRET a 13 se it reads "the Director;" ahd it should ‘be also probably amended to include not only the Director but anybody in the Department o Defense. : on Senator Tower. Yeah,ithe stylistic has to be changed to include everybody involved. Mr. diGenova. It says “The Director shall be required to provide inmediately the reasons for the waiver." And maybe he : fi : should first ‘be required te identify that there isa Waiver, and then the reasons, because then it. could be ‘possibly ‘read that he only have to give the réasons if asked. It could be construe a 4 that he does not have to come up here and tell that they are in. fact in a waiver -- | ' Senator Schwéiker. THis doesn't give him a right to. violate the law, does it, Fnioe? wnat do you mean by that { Hf a because I read it two WayS «: i! . : Mr. Maxwell. There ave certain regulations that. we " . - . are recommending CIA issue,! internal directives and the like, if -- and this is a general recommendation that just was ‘placed here because it dealt with the waiver of regulations ; : . at . . . in this particular case, but in cases where an internal | : It an directive is promulgated, this would require the Director to i . notify. committees of waivers that take place. The Committee could then ask him for the} iveasons for the waiver. \ fb It is a general recommendation so. that the committee is ‘able to determine when’ thete have been changes in the -governing TOP SECRET 9493520 Page 16
{ vt a 1 | procedures which it will be familiar with because they will 2 ||have copies of the Agency regulations. It would not provide 5 jfany right to violate the Law. | | 4 Senator Schweiker. that isn't clear. 1 would like to see something said about it in Section 2 below. In other words, 6 |iwhen I first read it I thought that even though we have the 7 l|\law, the Director can waive the law as long as he tells somebody 8 ||he is doing it. - would like to do something to the effect 9 ‘that such waiver does not “=- 10 Mr. Maxwell. Well, I think the intention of the Subcommitt 11: was that this provision, if the Full Committee approves it, 12 | would go to the back section on general recommendations (13 | affecting CIA, DOD and the jintelligence communities. 14 | Mr. Kirbow. You mean ‘a waiver of any regular intérnal th a 15 regulation would have to ba reported to the oversight committee.|| 16 "when it is probably too broad, Mr. Chairman, because that 17. means that a simple waiver of a Department of Defense regulation 18 || having to do with some reimbursement or travel or anything “49 like that would fall under this general -= if you are talking 20 ll about the drug: program or just the CIA's programs like that, 211}I could see it. Otherwise, this is a very broad mandate 22 || requiring extensive communication between the executive branch a ut 23 on a daily basis. . i 24 . Senator Schweiker. we are’ in trouble here, Elliot, because - 25: las I read it, this is so poorly written that if I want to waive TOP SECRET i WARD & PAUL HW 50955 Docld: 3274273570 Page i?
10° ll le 13 14 15 16. 1? 18 19 20 21 Re ron ; 24 £9 HW 50955 srl heo Page 16 . TOP SECRET | { — the fact that we don't, recruit clergymen, I can. as I read this thing, recruit clergymen, and just be required to advise people that I am doing/it.. Puy iy You have really got to narrow this. ‘Mr. Maxwell. The problem it was geared to was if in fact the Committee chooses to do certain things by way of internal .- directives, by requiring Agency regulations to be amended, there} . .. oi ihe ae Poo is.at this point no, in, particular circumstances, no requirement nf . , that the Director who is responsible for the issuance of those regulations notify the oversight committee. I think Charlie's|point is very well take in the sense that it is too broad now,.|and we can attempt to narrow it, but it does govern a whole series of questions directed toward ~ 1 i] q internal directives. | ot Mr. Aaron. I think thé first: question, Mr. Chairman, is do we want to include the Department of Defense in this particular Recommendation 1. If we do want to include the Department of Defense under this waiver, jwe have a very large issue. Is my understanding correct that that was a suggestion that had been made earlier? a . 1 “Al Mr. Kirbow. The point I was trying to make was that if. rd of this was to be a general recommendation, we Should take it out of the drug section and put it in the back. Mr. diGenova. Is [thee the general recommendation or is it only in the drug area? i | 7 TOP SECRET r WARD & PAUL ry
|. TOP SECRET ne | 16 Mr. Maxwell. My personal opinion would be that because i t. I we are making a number of recommendations in regard to the amending of the internal directives of the CIA, that some pro- vision should be made for a general recommendation insofar as ‘the oversight committee would be notified should there bea waiver for a particular reason by the Director of the internal directives that we are asking: him to promulgate. There is no requirement at this point that if the Director is asked to promulgate regulations in regard to the t recruitment of clergy, that they would Have to notify the over- sight committee that that was being done. You could simply waive the regulation in this particular case. He Now, it might ‘be argued that this would fall into the eee, fully and currently informed. Senator Huddleston. Well, I think here first of all we ought to address ourselves 'to the drug problém. It seems to me that No. 2 should have been No. l to start with. First establis what ~- | ‘Senator Schweiker. I don't really think it belongs here. I think you really get a can of worms, because I can read this to have a waiver to assassinate Presidents, you know. We've gota policy. There is no-statute now, and our policy is to not assassinate, so we can waive and say it is okay. Senator Huddleston. why don't we just strike the waiver paragraph. ., ' WARD & PAUL HW 50955 | DocId:4 433520 Page 19 ;
HW 450955 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25: DoclTd: 324234520 Page 20 amend the regulation. “why 17 ‘TOP SECRET Senator Tower. You can look at it anothei: way, too. To the extent that this procedure is required of any kind of regu- lation, be it a minor regulation on staff travel policy or some damned -insignificant thing like that. Mr. Maxwell. I think that is correct. As it is now drawn, it is overly broad, and.I don't think it belongs here. I think it probably belongs in ‘the; question of whether we make clear at rn os . some point that fully and currently informed includes any “th question’ of waiver of major regulations by the Director: Another example would be that where a regulation now provides the Inspector Genéral have access to all information, that could be waived and has been waived in the past by the Director in order not to allow the Inspector General to have access, and in that condition you would want’ the oversight committee's to know chat such a waiver had been made. That is why this isa generei edconnendation. Senator Schweiker. But you are setting up a bypass route. i That troubles me because it seems to me you go into any area, — you can get around it by alwaiver. I would rather not address ourselves to the subject and make it clear he has to issue a- new regulation. After all, he can still amerid his own iF . . : a regulation, the way to do it is regulations. If it is just give them a cause to cheat? Mr. Miller. Senator, iI ‘think this is addressed by two provisions we have suggested. The first is in the oversight TOP SECRET mM © Are
TOP SECRET 18 oo | ° , 1 | legislation which says “fully and.currently informed," of anything. 2 |}beyond a nitpicking, minor, trivial things that the oversight | oo S | committee would not be worried about. The committee would be poy , 4 | informed it would be the obligation of the agencies to do 5 it. 6 Secondly, in the general provisions here, we have the 7 | provision for a classified Federal Registry where regulations 8 |lare required to be deposited, and the oversight committee has 9 access to any changes in regulations, including such things as ~ 10 | waivers and so on. | i { 11 So I think in those two ways, the kind of question that 12 | Elliot is worried about really. is covered. So I don't think : : . I \ . 13 | it is necessary. 14 | Senator Schweiker. So |let's delete it then.. 15 Mr, Aaron. Well, .before we do, may I make one comment? 16 ' Pirst of all, I think it should be understood that the 17 || Director of the Agency writes his own regulations. The Directo 1g |of the Agency can amend his own regulations whenever he | 19 | wishes, and the Director of the Agency can waive his own 20 regulations whenever he wishes. The. regulations may be secret 2] or classified regulations. | And he may waive them or amend 39 them in secret. | | Poe Now, there are a number of recommendations that we make 24 |that go to the suggestion; that certain regulations be adopted 25 \|by the Agency. For example, we have had. an extensive discussio TO? SECRET HW 350955 Docld:32423520 Page ?1 : i
HW 450955 10 11 12 13 14 16 16 17 18 49 20° 21 22 23 24 20 DoclTd: 32423520 Page 22 ref SECRET ss of the use of academics or certain categories of personnel. _ They have a very linportant regulation called 50- 10, which regulates how they can use ‘Americans or members of the Vatican or members of the Red Cross or numbers of different kinds of people. “Some of these regulations say, you want to use somebody you have to get a waiver, or sometimes -- well, there ge all sorts of provisions like that. Now, I think the point of this suggestion was to make it clear that in these important policy cases, if there is to be a waiver which can take plack on: a classified basis, it is brought to the attention of the oversight committee, for these matters, not for the normal personnel and such issues. My personal view is tat this is not covered by our recommendations governing currently and fully informed, because ; ! that recommendation goes |to covert action. { { Mr. Miller. No, it doesn’t. Mr. Aaron. As far as I am aware, that is what it goes to. Mr. Kirbow. Might I suggest that if the Committee desires : | | | notice of changes in regulations on major policy questions, that we sinply have. the staff rewrite this to say that and put it back in the other section and consider it next time around. Senator Tower. I think it is going to have to be rewritten , | because everybody is unclear about it. Senator Schweiker. It doesn't belong here. TOP SECRET WARD & PAUL
| ‘TOP SECRET 20 1 - Mr. diGenova. There has to be a caveat in there that even 2 ||though you are ealking about a waiver, you are still not talking | t : 3 about anything that is inconsistent with the laws and the i. { | 4 Constitution of the United States, because we say that all the 5 jl way through, and the waiver cannot encompass a violation of 6 fla Law that the Congress has passed. 7 Senator Huddleston. That ought to be added. to the general 8 recommendations. | , ; . 9 ‘Mr. Maxwell. I think that is where it peionas 10 Senator Schweiker. and reédrafted. back to the conni eee | i Senator Tower. All right. Lf everybody is agreed, 12 || that will be redrafted and made a part of the general recommen- * “413 dations. | 14 Mr. Maxwell. It would deal with both waiver and promulgati g 45 new regulations. . - | 16 Mr. aaron. Right. 17 ‘Senator Tower. vés. 18 Mr. Bader. ‘And Blliot, I assume amend the current _ 19 ‘regulations. _ . | 20 Mr. Aaron. May I'suggest in doing this we take the ‘21 | point made by Mr. Miller and start out by simply saying, in 22 accordance with the policy of being gurseneby and fy 24 — we have that, phrase. now is_ in the covert ac action case. ee 25 Senator: Huddleston. That ought to be ‘established. TO® SECRET HW 50955 sectacd 4735270 Page 23
HW 50955 10 Ll. - le 13 14 15 1? 18 19 20 21 RA 235 24 29 TOP SECRET oy Mr, diGenova. It) is now on all intelligence activity. i If i Senator Tower. ALL right. 2 and 3 no objection. All right, let's move to Section x. Mr. Aaron. All right, now, we are on to the General’ Recommendations. We have five of them. r might just ‘say at the outset, these I think fall into the category of what the staff) would say or put forward as good ideas, in other words, that we haven't had'a hearing on each one of these subjects; our. total experience on some of them leads us to feel that some! of these steps would be. very useful; some of them fall into the category I think of helpful sugges~ tions as to how we might pkoceed in some of these general areas. The first one on security clearances, I think perhaps Mr. Miller would want to talk to it.. He had a great deal of experience with the security clearance problem as this ' committee was established, and I think it. flows from his ‘experience. Mr. Miller. Well, this very simply is based on our own Committee's experience on security clearances, and also based on the GAO study that was made of security clearances. There are on the civilian side vast inconsistencies in procedure and practice and: degree of thoroughness in the security clearance process. The suggestion here is that for. the civilian intelligence community, and possibly for the TOP SECRET Doclda: 32423520 Page 24 _  WaRD UR PAU.
10 ll 12 13 14 415 16 17 18 19 20 21° ae 25 24 re) BW 50955 DBacld: 324234520 Page 245 TOP SECRET | Congressional Committees, that there be a single applicable standard, that it be déne by one agency, that what would flow from this are economies: and a consistency of purpose ‘and a consistency of standard. This is something that I think would profit well in the future. ; ~ | S@nator Tower. Okay. Anything more on that? All right, personnel practices. Mr. Aaron. All right. I think the purpose of this is we have found as we have talked to a number of people’ in inter- views and what have you that to ensure. in these areas where there is a potential for people straying across the line of constitutional rights of others, that there be a conscious effort made by the Federal ‘Government to inculcate its employees with the proper idea of what the law and the Constitution require. That is the basic thrust of Recommendation B. Senator Tower.. Any comment on that? ‘Al. right, Section Cc, security functions of the intelligenc agencies. | Mr. Aaron. | Now, I think this makes a general observation concerning what the. security function of intelligence agencies ° not involved in law enforcenent, what in effect the policy should be. This is not, a recommendation as to precisely how one might implement. that policy, and I take it perhaps you TOP SECRET | WARD & PAUL
10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 - 21 22 (23 24 25. HY 4S0954 pocta:4 42735270 Page 26 ; i ee Y could inform us, Bob and Mike, as to the Domestic Group I believe is doing a considerable amount of work on dealing with the specifics of this.: This would really simply be the policy statement. “Elliot? | | , jf | oo, Mr. Maxwell. ‘here is a problem in that in that the last sentence of that, “security functions of the intelligence agencies may be in conflict with the detailed recommendations of the Domestic Subcommittee, and then a number of activities which were undertaken under Operation CHAOS and Operation MERRIMAC were designed in a larger sense and interpreted in the larger sense to be -based on the authority to protect the Agency's personnel. and facilities and to ensure that” intelligenc personnel follow proper security practices. Mr. Miller. But they were abuses of those migsions.. There was no problem with the missions, per se, Me. Kelley. The problem is they didn't think it was an abuse at the time. They just -interpreted it broad enough, I think we can flag this to be coordinated. “~~ re re mnie memes aces Se eee i fete ne eee rn eT ey : Mr. Kirbow. I do ‘have some serious reservation about -the - || detail which the Domestic report goes on this, and that is a general statement of policy, I think this Committee or the Subcommittee should adopt kind of a general policy that they © do have the requirement and that we think they should be authorized to do this in each individual agency. (therwise TO? SECRET " WaRD & PAUL
HY 0955 emergency powers that there were a great many orders of the ‘were not put into the Federal Register. The intention was to ‘bring all lawful orders of the President in the Register. We BDocld: 324235270 Page 27 ‘ f TOP SECRET HO | 24 i ! we wind up leaving not jonly personnel facilities: but putting a man's record in the record, and for the most part it is pretty naked. | Mr. Kelley. Charlie, |r think that is true, and I think po . —_ we have to make these match and fit. I don't think we can take any action on this not knowing what the other side has reference to. | 7 Senator Tower. The Chairman requested that we carry over D until his return, so to decede to his request, we will postpon consideration of D. i | _E deals with Federal Register for Classified Executive Orders. Mr. Miller. This i's a provision that was introduced some | | Pd a years ago by Senator Mathias and Senator Ervin dealing with the problem of -~- it was discovered during the investigation of President which because they’ were not called executive orders also found that there was provision for some classified material in. the Federal Register, although it was very seldom used. The purpose for this is to have a place where the lawful 1 i} . J : orders of the president and executive orders, by whatever name ae . called, are put in a place 'for purposes of official record. ‘Senator Tower. This would be a separate Federal TOP SECRET WARD & PAUL
TOP SECRET ad a : Q 4 4 o Register, in effect, for classified regulations and orders. — . i . . Mr. Miller. That's right. 25 - Senator Tower. And would have, of course, very limited circulation. It would not |be a public record. ; oo: | Mr.Miller. That is right. Senator Tower. And. do we say anything about access or ’ 1 provision? Mr. Miller. Only by the oversight committee. Senator Tower. By appropriate Congressional oversight committee would mean not necessarily the oversight committee, ‘but it could mean Appropriations or Armed Services, Mr. Miller. That|s right, in their area of “jurisdiction. | Senator Tower. Anything further on that? t I. Mr. Kirbow. There is ‘an escape valve. There is a provision where he can-do something immediately and then file it in an emergency. situation. Senator Tower. ALL right. With the instructions to. redraft Item 1 on page 118; and Dennen 2 Nene pot ate put it in the General Recommendations, with ‘the reservation that . the Chairman | will want |to take up “Section _D on page 120, and. et cn tee ete nt eee A I — we anerccndy |;we will consider it adoptea, Of course, in that we operated ee oe ™ ee Se . 7 | Senator Mathias. An ‘eventuality which is horrible to Toe SECRET nein eee tenner ens ' in order. V4 td ee! All right. HW. 50955 Docla:32423520 Page 26
10 11 “ie 13 14 15 16 1? 18 19 20 | a1 £2 23 24 #5 HW 50955 Docla: ‘TOP SECRET 26 i f . « il t : contemplate. OS cone Senator Tower. Senator Huddleston here has some redrafted language. | | |. Kes “Senator Huddleston. | Well, we have two very difficult subjects to resolve which T think will complete our findings and recommendations. one, be course, is the covert action which the Chairman has incorporated in some of his suggestions and wants to be here when we consider it, tomorrow I take it. | Also yesterday at the suggestion of Senator Mondale, we rewrote some provisions relating to the use of academics, and I would | ‘Roos suggest that we hold that. over also to give us a chance to f t look at this, to reconsider, the whole matter of academics and be prepared to move on it forthwith, tomorrow, if that is the. day the Chairman is going to be here. Mr. Miller. Yes, he it. Senator Huddleston. — “ana see if we can't resolve these two things tomorrow, and we will, have it wrapped up, Mr. t Chairman. Ms. Culbreath. Mr. Chairman, in- connection with the attempted “rewrite that We worked . on, there are a couple of typos in here that might hetp you if anybody really has time to look at them. . ot Fo ; — On page 77, on these inserts, about six lines down the second ‘word is + typed "for confirmation," and the word that was 1 . 2 { i : intended » there was "for continuation." This- is under TOP SECRET = ~~ . : | WARD & PAUL 24235520 Page 29
HW 450955 10. ll Le 13 14 15 16 1? 18 “as ~ 20 21 22 “os 24 25 recess. TOP SECRET 2” ' a t i Recommendation 43. Senator Tower. The ninth line, substitute "continuation" — for "confirmation." | Se | . Ms, Culbreath. That is the main one. ‘There may be a i few others, but that was the main one that really had a 4 very different meaning. | Senator Tower. Any mére on that? ‘Then this will be ‘carvied over until the Chairman returns. | | Senator Huddleston.’ Do I understand he will be here tomorrow? Senator Tower. He ‘willl be. 'Mr. Miller. Yes, he will be tomorrow morning. | He called and asked | ito meet tomorrow at 10:00 and 2:00 and Friday at 10:00. °° | to [4 Senator Tower. All. Pape . i Does that complete our business now? -_ Mr. Miller. I believe so, Sir. Senator Tower. All right, we will reassemble again at Mt 10:00 o'clock tomorrow morning, and then at 2:00 o'clock tomorrow afternoon. So until that time the Committee is in ' (Whereupon, at 3:02.5 o'clock p.m., the Committe recessed - i f! + to reconvene at 10:00 o'clock a.m., Thursday, March 25, 1976.) ‘Toe SECRET | WARD & PAUL Docld: 32423520 Page 30