Htoa-t0t46-10094) e,) cn oY As bit Paws | [ole #7e32ad | J | LSCR_ 17 October 1978 MEMORANDUM FOR : Deputy Director for Operations Deputy Director for Administration Deputy Director for Science §& Technology General Counsel FROM >: §. D. Breckinridge SUBJECT : Planning for the Final HSCA Report 1. We have asked the HSCA to arrange to give us sections of its report at different times to facilitate our review and response. There has been no response to this request although it has been made both in writing and orally. 2. The Memorandum of Understanding with the Committee provides that the Committee will notify the DCI in writing of its desire to disclose any information designated for protection by the DCI. Until advised to the contrary (and we will try to clarify it) our working assumption is that the submission of the final report to us will constitute a written notice of the desire to have the material in that report published. If the Committee does not receive a response "within five days," objecting to this and stating the reasons, then the Committee may disclose the information. There are provisions for subsequent exchanges on the point but the key provision is the first five-day period. 3. As a practical matter we will have two separate “reviews to conduct--a security review and a substantive review. We probably should plan to conduct the two reviews at the same time. Our formal agreement clearly provides for our right to take a stand in opposition to disclosure of sensitive material. We have been told that the Committee will also receive and consider any factual corrections that we offer and any statements of disagreement that we et 8 een ce, 2. inex cm rm PAR “3 This document may be downgraded tu AIUO “when "detached “From attachment coi ct ABA word urd cv reg LY ad Byte ee
14-00000 a! . ~ ec at a ~T pm e tye Port) e . ‘ 7 Tots ew ai ke tye i ddy have on substantive issues. 4, In anticipation of the short deadline (and the agreement says five days, not five working days) we should plan in advance on an informal working group consisting of representatives from the affected organizations (DDO, DDA, DDS&T, OGC and OLC). Directorate representatives should be authorized to designate persons within the Directorate, both substantively competent and in sufficient numbers to conduct the necessary reviews. At present the following components seem to have been involved: (a) Directorate of Operations: Plans Coordination Staff (Messrs. Gregg, Shepanek and Holmes), LA Division (Messrs. Sturbitts and Hawkins), SE Division r is), CI Staff (Messrs. Blee, McCoy eng( | Information Management Staff (Mr.~ponnelly) 25 (b) Directorate of Administration: Office of Security (Messrs. Solie an Reardon), Office of Personnel (Doris Houdesheldt). (c) Directorate of Science & Technology: Office of the Deputy Director (Mr. Clark), Office of Technical Service (Mr. Brandwein and Jean Turoff). (d) Office of the General Counsel: Mr. Rininger. aa ES enerai Counsel After there has been time to consider the problems that will be faced, the undersigned will ask for a meeting with repre- sentation as appropriate from the above components. — 5. Arrangements will be made by OLC with Printing Services Division for priority reproduction of the HSCA draft report immediately upon receipt. The number of copies will be determined by agreement among the above parties. Distribution of copies will be by hand on a priority basis. Various components will be organized for an intensive review for both security and substantive . issues of the sections affecting them. In essence, each component will prepare two different responses, one dealing solely with security considerations and the other dealing with factual corrections and disagreements with interpreta- tion and presentation. These papers will be prepared and forwarded to OLC which will consolidate the responses into a Single response. That paper will be reviewed in a working session by designated representatives of the various organizations. SeCk ei.
14-00000 “VP 6. <A common criteria for security review and pro- posed sanitization will be necessary to insure some rational standard and some degree of consistency in applying it. Fairly simple instructions will come the closest to meeting the requirements of such an operation and the attached guidelines present a useful point of departure in considering it. They were developed after some experience with the problem during the Church Committee investigations. While longer guidelines exist, they are not practical for a pressure operation such as this will be. 7. Present HSCA planning is to have available for our review a Summary Report to be considered by the full Committee in publie sessions mid-November. The Staff Summary of the investigations are planned for mid- to late- December. We should be ready in early November for the first round. . ‘ S. D. Breckinridge Attachment . cc: Mr. Gregg, C/PCS/LOC Mr. Shepanek, PCS/LOC Mr. Holmes, CI Staff Mr. Sturbitts, C/LA/Staff B Mr. Hawkins, LA/MGSB : Mr. Kalaris, C/SE Division: Mr. Blee, C/CI Staff Mr. CI Staff Mr? CI Staff Doris Houdésnheldt, 0/Personnel Mr. Brandwein, OTS Jean Turoff, OTS Mr. Hal Clark, DDS&T Mr. Rininger, OGC Mr. Donnelly, IMS Distribution 1 - DDO ~ DDA - DDS§&T - General Counsel er - OLC/Subject VEC Ra - OLC/Chrono 7 feo bet el bed pet