es Phone (Area 202) 544-6000 10 il 12 13 WARD & PAUL 14 16 “17 18 19 20 al 22. 235 410 2 Street, S.E., Washington, 0.C. 20003 24 R5 MW 54937 Dool \ r r 1949 these instructions. were given to an agent or an informant? Mr. Adams. To get involved in sexual activity? No, sir. Senator Huddleston.’ Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator Tower. Senator Mathias. ‘Senator Mathias. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to come back very briefly to the Fourth Amendment considerations in connection with the use of informants and in posing these questions we're not thinking of the one time volunteer who walks in to an FBI office and says I have a.story I want to tell you and that's the only time that you may see him. I'm thinking of the kind of situations in which there is a more extended relationship which could be of varying *‘ degrees. It might be in one case that the same individual will’ have some usefulness in a number of situations. But when - the FBI orders..a regular agent to.-engage in a search, the first} ¥ test is a judicial warrant, and what I would like’ to explore with you is the difference between a one time search which requires a warrant, and which you get when you make that search, and a continuous search which uses an informant, or the case of a continuous search which uses a regular undercover agent, someone who is totally under your control, and is ina slightly different category than an informant. ' Mr. Adams. Well, we get there into the fact that the Supreme Court has still held that the use of informants does not invade any of these constitutionally protected areas, and 232989520 Page 535
Pnone (Area 202) $44-6000 WARD & PAUL 410 First Street, S.E., Washington, 0.C. 20003 Nw 34937 10 il 12 13 14 16 17 ‘18° 19 20 21 22 23 24 25: Dee 132989590 Page 546 @ Ol © | 1950 if a person wants to tell an informant something that isn't protected by the Supreme Court. An actual search for legal evidence, that is a protected item, but information and the use of informants have been consistently held as not posing any constitutional problems. Senator Mathias. I would agree, if you're talking about the fellow who walks in off the street, as I said earlier, but is it true that under existing procedures informants are given background checks? Mr. Adams. Yes, sir. Senator Mathias. And they are subject to a testing period Mr. Adams. That's right, to verify and make sure they are providing to us reliable information. | Senator Mathias. And during the period that the relation- . Ship. continues, they are rather closely controlled by the handling agents. “Mr, Adams. That's true. Senator Mathias. So in effect they can come in a very practical way agents themselves to the FBI.:- Mr. Adams., They. can do nothing -- Senator Mathias. Certainly agents in the common law use of the word. Mr. Adams. That's right, they can do nothing, and we ; instruct our agents that an informant can do nothing that the agent himself cannot do, and if the agent can work himself into
| smn 12 g i $ i g at i 1 8 4 5 6 7 8 9 | 10 t 11 a p=] £ 12 fovas 9 . | & 13 3 | 15: : | 16 j | 1? ! : 18 8 19 g a ¢ 20 end & 21 = 3 22. "23 , 2 24 ¢ 25 NW 34957 Doclld: 32989520 Page O7 ‘can enter the premises, he can. enter the building, and there's. a less formal relationship with the Bureau than.a.regular degree of formal action required? an organization in an undercover capacity, he can sit there and glean all the information that he wants, and that’ is not in the Constitution as a protected area. But we do have this problem. Senator Mathias. But if a regular agent who is a member . of the FBI attempted to enter these premises, he would require a warrant? Mr. Adams. No, sir, ifa regular -- it depends on the purpose for which he is entering. If a regular agent by concealing his identity, by -- was admitted as.a member of the Commuriist Party, he can attend Communist Party meetings, and he no constitutionally invaded area there. Senator Mathias. And so you feel that anyone who has agent, who can undertake a continuous surveillance operation. as an undercover .agent.or as an informant. -- “Mr. Adams. As long as he commits no illegal acts. Senator Mathias. Let me ask you.why you.feel that it is impractical to .require.a warrant. since, .as I understand it, headquarters must approve the use of an informant. Is that
. & 3 t | wRRis :Si , © @ 1952 Sen. Sel. CIA 112/275 i Tap@9 ol Mr. Adams, The main difficulty is the particularity H ¢ ‘ “ i 's which has to be shown in obtaining a search warrant. You $ 2 ° . - < have to go after particular evidence. You have to specify 6 5 , E what you're going after, and an informant operates in an area that you just cannot specify. He doesn't know what's > going, to be discussed at that meeting. ‘It may be a plot to blow up the Capitol again or it may be a. plot to blow up the State Department building. . . Senator Mathias. If it were a criminal investigation, you would have Little difficulty with probable cause, wouldn't . 10 . . you? il Mr. Adams. We would have difficulty in a warrant to 12 use someone as..an informant in that area because the same 'WARD & PAUL 13 . - |) difficulty of particularity exists. We can't specify. 14 Ts . . . ; ; Senator Mathias. I understand thé problem because it's 15 ; very similar to one that we discussed earlier in connection 16 i | j | | 4 5 6 7 8 | | | | | | | | . . say wiretaps on a national security problem. | . 17 | Mr. Adams. That's it, and there we face the problem of | . 18 . where the Soviet, an individual identified as a Soviet spy 19 : . in a friendly country and they tell us he's been a Soviet spy 20 . there and now he's coming to the United States, and if we can't 21 . show under a probable cause warrant, if we couldn't show that 22 he was actually engaging in espionage in the United States, 235 . we couldn't get a wiretap under the probable cause requirements 410 eu dyreen S.E., Washington, 0.C. 20003 24 . . which have been discussed, If the good fairy didn't drop the 25 NW 34937 Dood: 32959520- Page 56
WARD & PAUL ve] n ro “hO Pnone (Area 202} 544-6000 10 11 12 13 14 “15 16 1; “18 19 20 21 a2 23 24 + 410 First Street, S.E., Washington, 0.C. 20003 * NW 349937: Do 25° @ | ; e , 1953 evidence in our hands that this individual is here conducting ‘espionage, we again would fall short of this, and that's why we're still groping with it. Senator Mathias. When you say fall short,’ you really, you would be. falling short of the requirements of the Fourth Amendment. Mr. Adams. That's right, except for the fact that the - President, under this Constitutional powers, to protect this nation and make sure that it survives first, first of all national survival, and these are the areas that not only the President hut the Attorney General are-concerned in and we're all hoping that somehow we can reach a legislative middle ground in here. Senator Mathias, ‘Which we discussed in the other nationa security area as to curtailling a warrant to that particular need. | Mr, Adams, And if you could get away from probable | cause and get some- degree of reasonable cause and get some ‘method of sealing indefinitely your interest, say, in an ongoing espionage case and can work out those difficulties, we may get their yet. Senator Mathias. And you don't despair of finding that middle ground? — | Mr. Adams. I don't because I think that today there's more of an open mind between Congress and the Executive Branch : a:32989520 Page 59
Phone (Area 202) 544-6000 LO ‘11 12 13 WARD & PAUL 15 16 | 1? 18 19 20 21 23 410 First Street, S.E., Washington, 0.C. 20003 24 25 14, 22° MW 24937 Dood: 32939520 Page 60 @ . 1954 and the FBI and everyone concerning the need to get these areas resalved. Senator Mathias. And you believe that the Department, if: we could come together, would support, would agreé to that ‘kind of a warrant requirement if we could agree on the language: Mr. Adams. If we can work out problems and the Attorney General is personally interested in that also. | *” Senator Mathias. Do you think that this agreement might ' extend to some of those other areas, that we talked about? Mr. Adams. I think that that would be a much greater difficulty -in an area of domestic intelligence informant who reports on many different operations and different types of activities that might come up rather than say in a Soviet “espionage or a foreign espionage case where you do have a littl more degree of specificity -to deal with. ‘Senator Mathias. I suggest that wé arrange to get together and try out some drafts with each other, but in the meantime, of course, there's another alternative and that ‘would be -the use of wiretap procedure by which the Attorney General must approve a wiretap before it is placed, ‘and the same general process could be used for informants, since you come to headquarters any way. Mr. Adams. That could be an alte wutive. I think it would be a very burdensome alternative «1 I think at some point after we attack the major abuses, or what are. considered 5
- Phone (Area 202) 544-6000 a ") WARO & PAUL 410 » Street, S.E., Washington, 0.C. 20003 NW 54957 Do @ | FO e 1955 major abuses of Congress and get over this hurdle, I think od . we're still going to have to recognize that heads of agencies have to accept the responsibility for managing that agency and we can't just keep pushing every operational problem up to the top-because there just aren't enough hours in the’ day. Senator Mathias. But the reason that parallel suggests itself is of course the fact that.the wiretap deals generally | with one level of information in one sense of gathering information, You hear what you hear from the tap. Mr. Adams. But you're dealing in a much smaller number also. Senator Mathias. Smaller number, but that's .all.the more reason. When an informant goes in, he has all of his senses. .He's gathering all of the-information a human being can acquire from a situation and has access to more information} than the average, wiretap. . And it would seem to mé that for that reason a parallel process might be usefui and in order, , on Adams. Mr. Mintz pointed out one other main distinction. to: me which I had overlooked from our prior discussions, which is the fact that with an informant he is more in .the position of being a concentral monitor in that one of the two parties to the conversation agrees, such as like myer concentral monitoring of telephones and microphones and anything else versus the wiretap itself where the individual a:32989520 Page 61
. gsh 5 Tar 1 whose telephone is being tapped is not aware and there is, - i j 2 and neither of the two parties talking had agreed that their ; | 3 conversation could be monitored. | 4 Senator Mathias. T find that one difficult to accept. 5 If I'm the third party overhearing a conversation that is takin 6 place in a room where I am, and my true character isn't perceived 9 by the two people who are talking, in effect they haven't 8 consented to my overhearing my conversation. Then they consent g || if they believe that I am their friend or their, a partisan 10 |} of theirs. . | 11 : But if they knew in fact that I was an informant for ai ‘12 || someone else, they wouldn't be consenting. & .- E 13 Mr. Adams. Well, that's like I believe Senator, art 3 “ja {| raised earlier, that the courts thus far have made this | 15 || distinction with no difficulty, but that doesn't mean that | 16 ||, there may not be some legislative compromise which might be | 17 addressed. 18 Senator Mathias. Well, I particularly appreciate your : 19 attitude in being willing to work on these problems because : 20 | I think that's the most important thing that can evolve from i 21 these hearings, so that we can actually look at the Fourth = 4 22 || Amendment as the standard that we. have ts achieve. But the Oo .93-|| Way. we, get there is obviously going to i “a lot easier if we , t 24 || can work toward them together. . ? . oe | 25 I’just have one final question, Vis. Chairman, and that J-ww $4997 , Dopra:a2989520 Page 62 ‘ ; _
gsh 6 * >. Phone (Aroa 202) 544-6000 # ‘ i LO 11 5 WARD & PAUL 13 14 15 16 “17 18 19 20 21 23 ») 410 First Strect, S.E., Washington, O.C. 20003 24 "25 | HW 54997 Dood: 32989520 Page 63 12 22- "1957 deals with whether we shouldn't impose a standard of probable cause that a crime has been committed as a means of controlling _the use of informants and the kind of information that they collect. Do you feel that‘this would be too restrictive? Mr. Adams. Yes, sir, I do.- When I look at informants and I see that each year "informants provide us, locate 5000 dangerous fugitives, they provide subjects in 2000 more cases, they recover $86 million in ‘stolen property and contraband, and that's irrespective of what we give the. lecal law enforcement and other Federal agencies, which is almost a comparable figure, we have almost -xeached a point in the criminal law where we’don't have much left. And in the intelligence field we still, I think when we carve all of the problems away, we still have to make sure that we have the means to gather information which will permit us to be aware of the jaentity of individuals and organizations that are acting to overthrow the government of the United States. And I think we still‘ have some areas to look hard at as we have discussed, but I think informants are here to. stay. They are absolutely essential to law enforcement. Everyone uses informants. The press has informants, Congress has informants, you have individuals in your community that you rely on, not for ulterior purposes, but to let you know” what's the fecl of the people, am I serving them properly,
e “a Q n a ~~] - . Phone (Area 202) 544-6000 ’ 4 WARD & PAUL » 410 First Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003 @ @ 1958 am I carrying out this? It's here to say. It's been here throughout history “" and there will always be informants. And the thing we want to avoid is abuses. like provocateurs, criminal activities, and to ensure that we have safeguards that will prevent that. But we do need informants. Senator Tower. Senator Hart, do you have any further questions? | Senator Hart of Michigan. Yes. I ask unanimous request perhaps with a view to giving balance to the record, the groups that we have discussed this morning into which the Bureau has put informants, in dopular language, our liberal groups -~ I would ask unanimous consent that .be printed in i} the record, the summary of the opening of. the headquarters file by the Bureau of Dr. Carl McIntyre when he announced that he was organizing a group to counter the American Civil Liberties Union and other "liberal and communist groups,". is not a left only pre-occupation. Senator Tower. Without objection, so ordered. ‘(The material referred to follows:) ‘WW 54997 Docld:32989520 .Page 64 ; ce me meer
; oy gsh @ "3 °o 2 B Oa Senator Tower. Any more questions? g Then the Committee will have an Executive Session this . Fe é afternoon in Room 3110 in the Dirksen Building at 3:00, and I hope everyone will be in attendance, Tomorrow morning we will “hear from Courtney Evans, Cartha DeLoach. Tomorrow afternoon, former Attorneys General Ramsey Clark and Edward Katzenbach. The Committee, the hearings are recessed until 10:00 a.m, tomorrow morning. (Whereupon, at 1:10 o'clock p.m., the hearing in the above mentioned matter was concluded, to reconvene on Wednesday December 3rd, 1975, at 10:00 o'clock a.m.) — WARO & PAUL > 410 First Street, S.E., Washington, 0.C. 20003 — MW A4asse7 Doold: 32989520 Page 65
ee oe... WR 45 WA PLAIN  6SSIPMSITAL 1u/3/75 GHS TO ALL abs - FROM ODRECTE Bo a \ a 7 . yy INTERV Ins Or FBI EMPLOYEES BY. CONGRESSIONAL ‘COMMITTEES - i) BY HEWORAWDUM TO JALL EMPLOYEES DATED. HAY 28 y 19755 CAPT 10s BD “{NTERVIEWS. OF FBI EMPLOYEES,” ALL EMPLOYEES WERE ‘ADVISED OF THE: NECESSITY OF SECU: ING FBI* HEADQUARTERS APPROVAL “PRIOR TO SUBIITTING ‘TO: “INTERVIEWS: BY ‘REPRESENTATIVES’ OF cone 7 GRESSIONAL | cONMITTEES. THE NECESSITY. OF: ‘SECURING THIS AP-, -PROVAL is PROMPTED BY THE EMPLOYMENT AGREENENT ALL, EMPLOYEES HAVE SIGNED. | a me a ~ YOU were ADVISED THAT CONGRESSIONAL, STAFF MENBER S s WERE coMDUCTING INTERVIEWS OF FORMER. AND/OR CURRENT EUPLOYEES a AND THAT THIS BUREAU HAD: PLEDGED ITS COOPERATION, WITH “CONS. GRESS. Ou COOPSRATIVE EFFORTS, OF COURSE » ‘MUST ‘BE CONSISTENT WITH BUREAU PROCEDURES: 7 Re CewILy, WE HAVE HAD “ATTEMPTS ‘BY CONGRESSIONAL. o COMMITT de STAR MEMBERS TO INTERVIEW CURRENT EMPLOYEES: WITHOUT. ° “PRIOR “CONTACT ‘WITH FBI HEADQUARTERS. YOU. ARE AGAIN REMINDED | MW 54957 Docid:32989520 Page 66 4
PAGE Tao ‘THAT, LF AL REPRESENTATIVE OF A CONGRESSIONAL CONMITTEE SHOULD . CONTACT A BUREAU ‘EMPLOYEE, THAT EMPLOYEE ‘SHOULD DECLINE TO RESPOND TO sUESTIONS. POSED TO HIM ‘AND ADVISE THE CoNGRES- - “SIONAL STAFF WEMBER OF THE NECESSITY OF RECEIV ING FBI: HEADQUARTERS: APPROVAL BEFORE RESPONDING 10, questioNs. r, xD aot . | . ‘ - _ : , 4 coh ye ‘ - a ~ i ; . ey - ' ~ : “ 9 may ‘. \ AY : . \ i 0 . \ an “ / t , | MW 34997 Doold: 32989520 . Page é7 : Lo ,
— oo. & | , — | NRGSS WA PLAIN ~ 6:3iPtNETsi 14/9/75 GHS - | TO ALL SACS 7 re os - FROM DIRECTOR: Coe 7 INTERV IEUS Ov FBI EMPLOYEES BY CONGRESSTONAL conn TIES a BY NEWORAWDUM 70 ALL EMPLOYEES DATED MAY 28, 1975, “CAPTIONED * NTERVIEWS OF FBI EMBLOYEES," “ALL EMPLOYERS WERE ADVISED Of THE NECESSITY OF sect 1NG FBI HEADQUARTERS APPROVAL ; PRIOR Ta suanITT ite To INTERVIEWS BY REPRESENTATIVES OB CON- GRESSIONAL CONMITTEES. THE NECESSITY. OF SECURING THIS AP PROVAL IS PROMPTED BY THE ENPLOYHENT AGREEMENT ALL EMPLOYEES . “HAVE SIGNED. ot YOU WERE ADVISED ‘THAT CONGRESSIONAL STAFF HENBERS WERE CONDUCTING ‘INTERVIEWS OF ‘FORKER AND/OR CURRENT EivPLOYEES AND THAT THIS. BUREAU HAD PLEDGED ITS. COGPERATION WITH CG N- WITH BUREAU PROCEDURES.  RACEUTLY, WE HAVE Had ATTEMPTS. BY CONGRESSIONAL - COMMITTEE STarr MEMBERS TO INTERVIEW CURRENT carvovess. vit0ut “PRIOR COWTACT WITH FBI HEADQUARTERS. | YOU ARE AGAIN REMINDED MW 54997 Doold: 32969520 Page 65 oN OO . 4 se . GRESS. OUR COOPERATIVE EF? FORTS, ‘OF COURSE; ‘MUST. BE CONSISTENT, ee nee te
. ace | | @ - | | | o@ PASS TWO - a THAT IF a RE iv HESENTATIVE OF A CONGRESSIONAL commaTTEE’ SHOULD - CONTACT A BUREAU EMPLOYEE, THA EMPLOYEE SHOULD DECLINE TO. “RESPOND TO GUE STIGNS POSED TO HIM AND ADVISE TRE CONGRES "SIONAL STAFF MEMBER OF ‘THE NECESSITY . OF RECEIVING PBL HEADQUARTERS APPROVAL BEFORE RESPONDING TO QUESTIONS. END | _ SO thes Us 4 NW 54997 Docld:32989520 Page 69
LL. ae . 528371 97 4y13' wera, AJN Be Be ' TO ALL “SACs” — | - | FROM D1aeeTor (62-116395) _ PERSI NAL po 7 - ee sewsTusy 7H J Po gaBUTEL WAY 2, 1975. . | . | ua Poses OF INSTANT TELETYPE: ARE TO, cy) RELTARATE THAT “BI MAS. PLEDGED FULL COOPERATION wITH THE SENATE SELECT. CONMITT 2... (SSC) AND WISHES TO ASSIST AND FACILITATE ANY: inva STIGATIONS UNDERTAKEN BY THE ssc. WITH RESPECT 10 THE FBI AND (4) SeT FORTH NEW PROCEDURE RELATING TO SSC" STAFF” oe - INTERVIuws OF “CURRENT. AND FORMER FBI. ‘EMPLOYEES. | | FOR ilviOR MATITN OF THOSE OFFICES WHICH HAVE: NOT PREVIOUSLY Had “CURKE NT OR FORMER ZNPLOYEES: In ITs TERR ITOY - INTER VIEWED BY TH $8 C, THE BUREAU. FREQUENTLY LEARNS FROM THE SSC OR OT ris Tbe TiaT FORMER EMPLOYEES ARE, BEING CONSIDERED: FOR INTEAV Las (BY THs SSC STAFF. , INSTRUCTIONS ARE ISSUED FOR. THE = 1HLD Sew icd 10 CONTACT THE FORMER EMPLOYEE 10 ALERT HIM aS, TO POSS1BLE LWieRVIEW, REMIND HIN OF HIS CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT ITA THe BUREAU. AND SUGGEST Tear LF HE IS- CONTACTED FOR WW 54997 Doold: 32989520 Page 70 a
pa Ted . , oe INTERVIE, - HE WAY CONTACT THe LEGAL COUNSEL DIVISION BY COLLECT ‘CALL. FOR FURTHER ENFORMATION. IN, THE. ‘USUAL CASE, As cincunistace's| UNFOLD, THE FORNER EMPLOYEE is’ TOLDCL) THAT He. HAS, A RIGHT TO -LEGAL. couNséL BUT THAT THE BUREAU. | CANNOT PROVIDE SAME (2) THAT THE BUREAU. “HAS “WAIVED THE , CONF IDEWT TALITY AGREEMENT “FOR. THE, INTERVIEW WITHIN SPECIFIED PARAMETERSS- AND. (3) THAT THERE ARE FOUR PRIVILEGED, AREAS IN, WHICH. HE IS. NOT REQUIRED TO. : ANSWER QUESTION. «THESE AREAS oa | “ARE. RELATING TQ INFORMATION, WHICH MAY CA) IDENTIFY- BUREAU’ a sourcis; (B) REVEAL “SENSITIVE weTHODS/TECHNIQUES; CO) REVEAL IDENTITIES OF THIRD AGENCIES, INCLUDING FOREIGA INTELLIGENCE , “AGEWCIES, OR INFORWAT 10. ‘FROM: “suc AGENCIES$ "AND «D. ADVERSELY | AFFECT “ONGOING. BUREAU INVESTIGATIONS. — _ ee +) HSRET TOFORE, BUREAU. HAS QFFERED INTERVIEWEES CONSULTATION, . PRIVILwE BES WHE EREBY, A BUREAU SUPERVISOR WOULD.- BE, AVAILABLE* " | HEARBY, ALTHOUGH NOT ACTUALLY at INTERVIEW, 0 meee MIGHT LONSULT WITR HIM. SHOULD Questions ARISE’ AS: 0. PARAMETERS OF INTERVIEY ‘OR PRIVILEGED AREAS THE CONSULTANT DID: NOT. ACT as’ A“LAGAL ADVISOR. os ~ . ap rive LhED LATELY, BUREAU: WILL NO LONGER “PROVIDE. we 2, ; , ak MW 54997 DocId:32989520 Page 71 —
PAGE TH ae ON-THs+SCaui PERSONNEL FOR ‘CONSULTATITN, PURPOSES TO ASSIST a SITHEA, CURRENT OF FORMER EMPLOYEES.’ - PROSPECTIVE iNTERVIEWEES SHOULD Bu TOLD THAT, «IF THEY DESIRE AS SSISTANCE OF THIS NATURE DURING ait INTERVIEW, THEY MAY CONTACT: EITHER PERSONALLY. CIF WTeRVIbw 1S. Ti, WASHINGTON; De Ce) OR ‘BY COLLECT \CALL y, THE “ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF THE PNTELLIGENCE ‘DIVISION, MR. we R. WaidiisLL On, IN HIS ABSENCE, SECTION OKIE We O. “CREGAR. THIS CHANGE IN PROCEDURE SHOULD NOT BE’ CONSTRUED AS oe LESSENING THE ASSISTANCE WE ARE FURNISHING TO. CURREWT AND FORMER eiPLOYEES. a ae are | VOR YOUR ADB ITLONAL INFORWAT 104, TAN sowie vita tig? | DEPART MENT Ii EXPLORING AVENUES To “ARRANGE LEGAL REPRESENTATION, WHEY WeGe soSARY, FOR CURRENT and PORHER EMPLOYEES WITHOUT es EXPENSe°"To. THEN. YOU WILL. BE KEPT ‘ADVISED OF DEVELOPHENTS IN TaLs KEGARD. St a - Loe , ey nD) , ee | | | oo 7 REC FBI KO. BAd CLR re ot oy N NW 54997, DosId:33989520 Page 72 — . ae *
PART ee ee RSE EO GE: pie nae Boake ies oan a SEES we See » . @ oy a Se aneuat ns f PERSONAL ATTENTION 5 MEMORANDUM 35-7 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20535 August 12, 1975 MEMORANDUM TO ALL SPECIAL AGENTS IN CHARGE: (A). INTERVIEWS OF FBI EMPLOYEES BY CONGRESSIONAL STAFF MEMBERS -- In accordance with a recently adopted suggestion, you are to insure that all new employees who enter on duty in your field . office are fully apprised of the contents of the Memorandum to All Employees, dated May 28, 1975, dealing with captioned matter. This should be done at the time they execute the FBI Employment Agreement, FD-291, regarding the unauthorized disclosure of information. This practice can, of course, be discontinued upon the completion of the inquiry that Congress has instituted. ) SEARCHED. conve HEXED... Or SERIALIZED. Perea. AUGL 41975 EEI—HOUS ON NW 34957 Doold:i 32989520 Page 73 ee ' * ny oe . . . nr’ w% ro rane lofi “tie oP eatin, BF Senden ae * - -¢ be Rs t wis . | : 2 § Bes * - GF, 2 ¢ og - . a Pp ie ie ar Msladn tegeniane th Este, sa "i ~ ake nat on ans dy * a wt we
NRO22 "WA CODE - Ce Nee 7 /U:@5PM NITEL 6-18-75 Vlg. TO-ALL sacs , ke on FROM DIRECTOR cozetieaga ot, | ! | r PERSONAL ATTENTION ’ bie So HOUSTUDY 73. - | - , REBUTELS HAY 2, 20, 1975 ¢: "genstuby 155" BUFILE 62-116464 AND CODE. "WARE “ HOUSTUDY 75” DESIGNATED FOR ALL MATTERS RELATING TO HOUSE SELECT. COMMITTEE TO STUDY , GOVERNMENT AL- OPERATIONS WITH RESPECT. TO! ENTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES | L AND BUREAU'S HANDLING OF. MATTERS PERTAINING THERETO. USE. Me 8 THIS FILE NUMBER AND CAPT ION FOR! MATTERS RELATING TO HOUSE ©, at ne ‘“s SEPARATE FROM, SENSTUDY 13, FOR haTTERS RELATING a nN a , ’ Js } | Oo | SS } = - . ~: - @- 2196 - “L + “SEARCHED INDEED . sy So JUN 13 1975 te FBI — HOUSTON NW 54997 Docld:32989520° Page 74 te oe oo cg
= met NW 5 4 ez = cod we 3 2 < Soe UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20535 £ é May 28, 1975 ZL. MEMORANDUM TO ALL EMPHOYEES All employees are advised that Congress is conducting an inquiry into activities of the Federal Bareau of Investigation. Congressional staff members are condu¢ting interviews of former and current FBI employees. This Buran has pledged its cooperation with the Congress. RE: INTERVIEWS OF yl congress i, t You.are reminded of the FBI Employment Agreement (copy attached) with which you agreed to comply during your employment in the FBI and following termination of such employment, Also, you are reminded of Title 28, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 16.22 (copy attached), which reads as follows: "No employee or former employee of the Department of Justice shall, in response to a demand of a court or other authority, produce any material contained in the files of the Department or disclose any information relating to material contained in the files of the Department, or disclose any information or produce any material acquired as part of the performance of his official duties or because of his official status without prior approval of the appropriate Department official or the Attorney General in accordance with Section 16, 24," Also, you are reminded of Department of Justice Order ’ Number 116-56, dated May 15, 1956, (copy attached) which, among other things, requires an employee upon the completion of his testimony to prepare a memorandum outlining his testimony. bo 2 2 G Vie Z S Our cooperative efforts, of course, must be consistent with the above cited authority. Therefore, if you are contacted for purpose of interview or testimony you are to request approval as required by the Employment Agreement and await authorization before furnishing information, testimony, or record materia¥éarchep “_inpExep . SERIALIZED, FILED. 2 4 ‘ AN [ = - Hous, ON na 7: a Enclosures (3) ‘Clarence M. Director Page 75