## Page 1

11704-10337-10002

2025 RELEASE UNDER THE PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY ASSASSINATION RECORDS ACT OF 1992

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

25 August 1993

NOTE FOR: All HRG Members

SUBJECT:

Briefing of HPSCI on Denied JFK Documents

This is to let everyone know that HRG has been asked to

brief the HPSCI staff on the 10,000 pages of JFK materials

that we have denied in full (so far).

The request came from HPSCI Chairman Dan Glickman, who

apparently anticipates questions from others in Congress

about the denied documents.

Among the questions we are asked to address in the

briefing are the following:

- HOW

many documents are involved (as opposed to

pages) ?

- What specific types of sources and methods are

we protecting?

- What is the review process?

- Who made the judgments to deny the documents?

there provisions for continuing review of the

denied documents?

We've asked that the briefing not take place until the

week of 30 August, but HPSCI may want it sooner.

ук. 6

John F. Pereira

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

---

## Page 2

13-00000

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

EPSCI BRIEFING OUTLINE

26 August 1993

CIA SPECIAL COLLECTIONS

RELEASE IN FULL

2000

JFK ASSASSINATION RECORDS

I.

II.

Overview: CIA declassification program for JFK records

- Sequestered files and Oswald 201 file

- Total JFK records:

Hardcopy documents: 162,000 pages

Microfilm: 73 reels, 150,000 pages

Resources devoted to JFK

Number of people: 15. HRG (9 staffers, 6 retirees)

indexers (overtime, weekends)

10 DO for coordination

(ASCA material Are t

III.

Documents Released:

Oswald

Sequestered files

Total

35,000 pages

90,000 pages

125,000 pages -

Indexing and identification forms for each document

Show example of, iden form

Withheld temporarily:

HSCA-originated:

Third Agency

20,000 pages

7,000 pages

Denied-in-full

- Continuing review of the DIF documents by HRG

- Likelihood CIA will release a number (many ?) of DIF

- Review Board's determination on DIF items

SAN

- review for Panel

---

## Page 3

13-00000

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

'.

IV.

v.

vI.

Identification forms provided to NARA for each DIF

Document

Types of information protected in DIF items

- Grounds for postponement of information under JFK

Law

Who made judgments on withholding documents

- 15 reviewers

- Followed procedures

- Senior Reviewers provided guidance

- Directorates coordinated

- Third agency coordination

VII. Issues for Review Board

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

---

## Page 4

13-00000

-1=

HPSCI BRIEFING OUTLINE

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

CIA SPECIAL CQI SeptombON$ 3

RELEASE IN FULL

2000

JFK ASSASSINATION RECORDS

Introduction: Discuss how CIA fulfilled requirements of the

JFK Act.

•Discuss the withheld documents

General Remarks

1. Every JFK record will be seen by the Review Board.

2. We have followed the JFK Assassination Records Act

in determining which records will be postponed. (Section 6)

- Our presumption was that a record would be released.

We made every effort to meet the 22 August deadline

established by the JFK Act. The Director was committed to

this.

This called for a major eftort--additional people,

Iot of overtime and

weekend shifts.

5. We are continuing to review the postponed documents,

and expect to release a high percentage of them.

---

## Page 5

13-00000

23 January 1996

CIA SPECIAL COLLECTIONS

Memo for Record

RELEASE IN FULL

Subjéct: - Status of JFK Records Review 2000

References: Letter from Marwell to Pereira, dtd 15 Dec 96,

(same subject) ;

Letter from Pereira to Marwell, dtd 19 Jan 96,

(response to above letter) ;

Phone Conversation with Marwell, 22 Jan 96,

(same

subject).

1.

Marwell requested a figure for the number of

records in the sequestered files that contained

postponements.

I explained that our review figures were

based on pages and that there was no record count for the

microfilm part of the collection.

However, based on the HRG

index unaudited record count (see below) of the Oswald 201

file and the JFK hardcopy boxes, I was able to give him an

estimate of 28,000 records.

2. Unaudited HRG Index statistics:

Total Records

Records w/Postponements

Oswald

4, 349.

1,871

JFK

(63 boxes) 28,532

12, 132

32,881 (154,724 pages) 14,003

The page count for the hardcopy part of the collection is

within 10,000 pages of the Microfilm (163,500) •

Given that

the microfilm contains many duplicates and similar records

as the hardcopy, the percentage of sanitized documents

should be close to the same. I estimate the total number of

records with postponements to be approximately

no 26, puber of

---

## Page 6

13-00000

CONFIDENTIAL

NOTE FOR:

< Richard E. Schroeder

FROM:

John F. Pereira

DATE:

03/27/96 05:54:53 PM

SUBJECT:

Phone Conversation with Susan Oullette, HPSCI

As you requested, I called Susan Oullette, HPSCI Staff today to respond to her questions about JFK Assassination records. She said that

the Committee was interested in the process used for declassifying the records, the status of our review, and what criteria we use for

declassification.

Following are among the main topics we covered during a discussion of about 10 minutes on the STU-Ill:

- A description of the JFK records held by CIA

- Process of declassification (review by retired senior officers, coordination with DO,

OGC, others)

- Criteria for redaction

• Coordination with FBI, other agencies on third agency documents.

• Presidentially-appointed JFK Assassination Records Review Board

.. Differences with the Board on release of certain information e.g..

names of former employees, identification of stations

.. Current appeal to the White House of decision by Board to release

certain information we redacted.

Efforts of the Board to identify additional records, including in other

countries

Susan said that she may have enough information for now, but she would let me know if more would be needed. l invited her to visit us if

she wanted more details or to look at the records.

CC:

Brian S. Latell, J. Barry Harrelson, Fred Wickham @ DO

CONFIDENTIAL

---

## Page 7

13-00000

EVENT: QUICK COM

PLACE: 7BO0 HQS

CONFIDENTIAL

DATE: 03/27/96

TIME: 1500

STATUS: X

KEY: C/96-05672

FOR: HPSCI

SUBJ: JFK ASSASSINATION DOCUMENTS

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: RICHARD SCHROEDER - SECURE: 3-9940

---> (PARTICIPANTS) <---

ASSOC

NAME

ROLE

STAFF

CIA

OUELLETTE, SUSAN MARY (HPSCI)

PEREIRA, JOHN (DCI/CSI)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

BRER

In response to a request from HPSCI staffer Susan

Ouellettee, John Pereira, Chief of the Center for the Study

of Intelligence's Historical Review Group, called her to

discuss staff questions. Attached is his

memo of that

•telecon.

QUOTE:

I called Susan Ouellette, HPSCI Staff today to respond to

her questions about JFK Assassination records. She said

that the Committee was interested in the process used for

declassifying the records, the status of our review, and

what criteria we use for declassification.

Following are among the main topics we covered during a

discussion of about 10 minutes on the STU-III:

A description of the JFK records held by

CIA

Process of declassification (review by

retired senior officers, coordination

with Do, OGC, others)

- Criteria

for

redaction

- Coordination with FBI, other agencies on

third agency documents.

Presidentially-appointed JFK Assassination

Records Review Board

- - Differences with the Board

on release of certain information

e. g., names of former

employees,

identification of stations

Current appeal to the White

House of decision by Board to

release certain information

we redacted.

---

## Page 8

13-00000

--

Efforts of the Board to

identify additional records, including

in other countries

Susan said that she may have enough information for now, but

she would let me know if more would be needed. I invited

her to visit us if she wanted more details or to look at the

records.

END QUOTE

SUPPORTING TEXT:

no further text in this document (U)

-..

Richard E. Schroeder

DCI /OCA/CLG

28 March 1996

•Distribution:

DCI/CSI

DO/ORMS

DDI

OGC

OCA

RES chrono

CL BY 620119

CL REASON 1.5C

DECL ON X1

DRV FM HUM

4-82

CONFIDENTIAL

---

## Page 9

13-00000.

SECRET

From the Desk of Richard E. Schroeder-C-

NOTE FOR:

FROM:

DATE:

SUBJECT:

John Pereira

(Laurle Goodwin A DO

(Richard E. Schroeder-C-

03/28/96 01:19:41 PM

HPSCI Request for staff brief on JFK assassination

HPSCI staffer Susan Ouellette liked John Pereira's 27 Mar 96 telecon on the JFK assassination issue (see attached note) so much that

she'd like to schedule a staff brief for sometime in the next two weeks. She'd like the brief to concentrate on two issues mentioned by

John in the telecon:

-Differences with the Board on release of certain info (names of former employees, identification of stations,

and

-Current appeal to the White House of decesion of Board to release certain info we redacted.

Defer to John and DO addees to work out who'll brief (see separate note from DO/ORMS Laurie Goodwire Bill McNair.)

Ouellette suggests c. 1000 either Apr 2, 3, or 4, or Apr 9, 10, 11 since HPSCI recess schedule is pretty open.

John, pls advise your timing preference. Thanks.

C9605672.DOC

CC:

Brian Latell

Barry Harrelson

Fred Wickham @ DO

William McNair @ DO

(Virginia B. OKUM, ® DO

Montgomery Rogers

(Charles Boykin

(Joyce Woodburn

(Jacqueline Mitchell

SECRET

---

## Page 10

13-00000

MEMORANDUM FOR:

Attendees at the meeting with HPSI Members on Wed:

Mike Sheehy

§Christine Healey

[Steve Nelson

Doug Bowman 3 t

Bill Lieser -

Date

575 101 4967045005

4/96

*U.S.GPO: 1989-253-195/00416

---

## Page 11

13-00000

SECRET

TO:

John Pereira

(Laurie Goodwin @ DO

FROM:

Richard E. Schroeder C-

DATE:

04/03/96 12:57:18 PM

SUBJECT: [Re: PSCI Request for staff brief on JFK assassination

HPSC/ staffer Susan Ouellette liked John Pereira's 27 Mar 96 telecon on the JFK assassination issue (see attached note) so much that

she'd like to schedule a staff brief for sometime in the next two weeks. She'd like the brief to concentrate on two issues mentioned by

John in the telecon:

-Differences with the Board on release of certain into (names of former employees, identification of stations),

«Current appeal to the White House of decesion of Board to release certain into we redacted.

Deter to John and DO addees to work out who'll brief (see separate note from DO/ORMS Laurie Goodwin re Bill McNair.)

Ouellette suggests c. 1000 either Apr 2, 3, or 4, or Apr 9, 10, 11 since HPSCI recess schedule is pretty open.

John, pls advise your timing preference. Thanks.

C9605672.DOC

I've now confirmed our briefing for HPSCI at 1030 Weds 10 April. Pls let me know who will attend for CSI and the DO.

Thanks. OCA van will depart from OHB Main Entrance at 1000. RES 1255/3Apr96.

CC:

Brian Latell, Barry Harrelson, Fred Wickham @ DO, William McNair @ DO, Virginia B. OKUM@ DO, Montgomery

Rogers, Charles Boykin/ Joyce Woodburn, Jacqueline Mitchell>

SECRET

---

## Page 12

13-00000.

ADMINISTRATIVE - INTERNAL USE ONLY

From the Desk of Linda C. Cipriani

SECRET

NOTE FOR:

FROM:

DATE:

SUBJECT:

John F. Pereira

J. Barry Harrelson

(Linda C. Cipriani

04/09/96 01:51:24 PM

HPSCI talking points

Thought you may be interested in seeing in advance an outline of what I plan to say at the HPSCI briefing. Of course, I will be ready to

alter this according to the circumstances of the meeting!

Talking Points

I. Statutory Authorities of the JFK Board

1.

The JFK Act states that all government

records relating

to the JFK assassination should carry a presumption of immediate

disclosure and that all records will eventually be disclosed.

Although the Act allows for the postponement of release of

certain information, all records will be disclosed in full by

2017 unless the President certifies that protection is still

necessary.

2.

Under the JFK Act, the JFK Board determines what is an

"assassination record" and whether an assassination record

qualifies for postponement. The Board has the power to direct a

government agency to make

available to it, not only assassination

records, but additional information which it believes is

necessary to fullfill its duties under the Act.

It has has the

power to request the Attorney General to subpoena private

persons, records and other information relevant to its

responsibilities under the Act.

II. Appeal Procedures set out in JFK Act

1.

Once Board has determined whether a record shall be

released or postponed, it must send a "Notification Letter" to

the head of the agency (DCI)

2.

Only recourse for an agency that disagrees with Board

determination is to appeal to the President.

The President has 30 days from the date of the

Notification Letter to reply to appeal

a.

White House asks that agencies submit any

ADMINISTRATIVE - INTERNAL USE ONLY

HET

---

## Page 13

13-00000

ADMINISTRATIVE • INTERNAL USE ONLY

appeals within 7 days of receiving Notification Letter

4.

CIA has never before presented an appeal to the

President; FBI presented an appeal last year but the White House

told the parties to work out their difficulties.

III. February 8th Appeal

In November and December of 1995, the JFK Board

notified DCI of the release of documents that would:

- implicate high-ranking Mexican officials in a Goint

(tel-tap) operation against foreign embassies, - Mexican liaison

(December 7)

- reveal station in Helsinkil (December 27)

- identify sensitive unilateral source in the

Nicaraguan service (November 28)

2 .

On February 8, DCI submitted an appeal to the President

on these issues.

a.

Admittedly, CIA did have problems getting appeal

out on time. The JFK staff was very understanding of our time

recognized that the time periods set out in the Act are too short

to bring an appeal.

b.

The reason for CIA's delay was simply because the

decision to appeal a Board determination to the President of the

Us is very difficult one to make, both on a procedural and a

substantive level. As CIA never did an appeal before, it did not

have an efficient system worked out.

Today, the procedure is as follows: Once HRG is

notified of Board decisions, they immediately pass this on to OGC

and the DO. The appropriate components within DO are asked

whether the release would cause current damage to the national

security or intelligence operations or sources.

If so, they are

tasked to provide a written assessment of that damage.

d. An appeal package is then prepared by OGC and the

DO. This package must then be approved by GC, DDO, EXDIR, DDCI

and DCI.

Although CIA's turn around time is improving, it

can take several weeks to task the appropriate people, have them

gather the information needed to prepare an appeal and then get

this up to the DCI.

3.

Despite our time problems, the JFK Staff was

cooperative in the process of bringing this appeal to the

President:

ADMINISTRATIVE - INTERNAL USE ONLY

---

## Page 14

13-00000

ADMINISTRATIVE • INTERNAL USE ONLY

a.

Before submitting appeal to the President, I faxed

copy of appeal to JFK Board's General Counsel with the idea that

if it presented new and convincing evidence, he would present it

to the Board during its session.

b.

Shortly after submitting the appeal to the

President, I spoke with White House Counsel and Counsel to JFK

Board. We agreed to put the appeal on hold until the Board could

review CIA's submission to the White House and possibly

reconsider its determinations in light of additional information

presented in the appeal.

I talked with JFK Board's Counsel and Executive

Director regularly about the best way to handle the appeal.

I

arranged with them to have the General Counsel of CIA to come to

the Board's February meeting and present new information

d.

On February 29, the General Counsel of CIA and I

met with the JEK Board and their staff.

We discussed issues on

appeal as well as 3 other stations recently released (Oslo,)

(Stockholm, Copenhagen) •

e.

Based on the information presented by CIA at this

meeting, the Board reconsidered and agreed to protect all of the

issues on appeal as well as 3 other stations.

IV. Future appeal procedures

1. Both JFK Board and CIA agree that we should never have

to appeal something to the President and we should try to work

out difficult issues on our own.

In the last 2 months, when CIA believed that a release

would damage the national security, the Board has invited us to

their meetings to present additional evidence on the issue. In

some cases, they have reconsidered their decision and protected

the information.

3.

The Board also recently released TokyO station - we are

arranging to meet with them at the end of this month to present

stronger arguments. for protecting this station.

The Board is now considering the release of names of

CIA employees who retired under cover.

It is very important for

CIA's mission that the names of its employees,

especially those

who remain covert, be protected even after retirement.

In the

spirit of cooperation and in the hopes of getting the

Board to

understand this, CIA helped arrange a meeting between the JFK

Board's General

Counsel and a retired CIA covert employee

ADMINISTRATIVE - INTERNAL USE ONLY

RETT

---

## Page 15

13-00000

ADMINISTRATIVE - INTERNAL USE ONLY

SECRET

currently living in Europe.

CIA hopes that after hearing from

the

employee about his objections to having his name released and

the

harm that may come to him, the Board will agree to protect

his

name, and others like him, from release.

CC:

SECRET

ADMINISTRATIVE - INTERNAL USE ONLY

pe5is...

---

## Page 16

13-00000

SECRET

- 4:

не битта.

s= typees o

recures

HPSCI BRIEFING - JFK DECLASSIFICATION

10 April 1996

1.

Nature of the records--Oswald 201, sequestered hady cumicalle

- Other records: Minutes of DCI morning meetings; working

files

- Third Agency documents:

FBI, SSCI, Presidential libraries

, 2.

Pages released

(227, 000)

- Percentage of pages

redacted; 70 %

3.

Process of declassification

- Former senior officers in HRG review

- Coordination with OGC, DO (DO team detailed to HRG)

Standards for review in JFK Assassination Records Collection

Act, 1992

- Records related to the assassination or investigation

into the assassination

Ecution exile actruitres

- Law provides grounds for postponement of disclosure of

records

-- "Clear and convincing evidence" must be pre-

sented to the Board

E.g., Identity of agent currently requiring

protection

- Source or method currently utilized

- Foreign government relationship cur-

rently requiring protection

5.

Board has authority to release records unless it agrees there

"clear

and convincing evidence" to support a postponement

- Board then has to justify on the record each redaction

with which it agrees

- Once a determination is made, Board must publish it in

Federal Register within 14 days

---

## Page 17

13-00000

- Options available:

European station"

substitute language e.g., "Northern

- Also, summary of a record

- Board has access to every document in full

6. Issues raised by Board's decisions:

- Problem: Board has difficulty in linking disclosure of

information that is 30 years old with damage to current

intelligence operations

window?

- Identification of stations e.g. (Helsinkainl941 - Sept 1964

exceptinns

- Names of former Agency employees who retired under cover

- Board guidelines: Protect person if retired under

*

- Liaison,

- Briefing of the Board by Dave Edger, Jeff Smith, Central

Cover, DO desk officers, others

- Problem of accumulative effect of releases--eroding cover,

ability to conduct operations

7.

Provision for appeal to the White House if we disagree

with Board's determination

- President has sole authority to require postponement of

a record or information

--President required to advise the Board within 30 days

of the Board's determination

-- This is published in the Federal Register

8. Current appeal (now resolved)

- Issues:

identification of Agency asset

liaison relationship

identification of station

- Potential appeal: (Tokyo! station

9.

Additional requests of Board to review other records e.g.,

history of Mexico City station, Intelligence Community Staff

records

→ document excuses

Noles: a Buard dues n't

accept "

postponement -neguines

parc-ple" as just. ficatinn for

cuickence

• preceded set thy JFK →re FEllA ele.....

Adian a

---

## Page 18

13-00000

SECRET

WTC/Memorandum for the Record

DATE: 04/10/96 TIME: 1030

Page

1

(KEY: C/96-05677)

STATUS: COMPLETE

EVENT: STAFF BRIEFING

PLACE: H-405 CAPITOL

FOR: HPSCI

SUBJ: JFK ASSASSINATION DOCUMENTS

— (PARTICIPANTS) -

ASSOC

STAFF

STAFF

STAFF

' STAFE

STAFF

STAFF

STAFF

CIA

CIA

CIA

CIA

CIA

NAME

BARTON, CHRISTOPHER

(HPSCI)

DUPART,

LOUIS H. (HPSCI)

EBERWEIN, CATHERINE D. (SPSCI)

HEALEY,

LOUISE CHRISTINE (HPSCI)

LOWENTHAL, MARK M. (HPSCI)

OUELLETTE, SUSAN MARY (HPSCI)

SHEEHY, MICHAEL WILLIAM (HPSCI)

(CIPRIANI, LINDA' (DCI/OGC)

HARRELSON, BARRY (DCI/CSI)

PEREIRA, JOHN (DCI/CSI)

(SCHROEDER.. RICHARD) (DCI/OCA)

WICKHAM, FRED (DO/IMS)

— ( EXECUTIVE SUMMARY) -

ROLE

BRER

•BRER

BRER

SPRT

BRFR

Following a telephone conversation with HPSCI staff in which HRG/CSI noted a number of JFK assassination

declassification issues (see OCA C/96-05672 of 27 Mar 96,) CSI, DO,-and OGC briefed staff on.the status.of the JFK

declassification effort, the 1992 law which established the JFK Assassination Records Review Board and the scope of the

Board's authority, and the details of some current declassification issues we have been addressing with the Board. We noted

the close working relationship between the Agency and the Board, and said that the Board staff is trying to understand the

Agency's equities and perspectives. Some staff expressed concern about the Board's broad powers and authorities under the

1992 law, particularly regarding declassification of intelligence material bearing on identities, sources, and methods. (S)

—( ADDITIONAL INFORMATION) —

1. C/CSI/Historical Review Group Pereira opened by briefly describing the nature of the CIA JFK material. The

open-ended "Oswald 201" also includes material gathered after the assassination, and the "sequestered file" is that material

that was assembled for the JFK assassination investigations. The material was originally sanitized and released to the

National Archives in 1993. We are now reviewing the 227,000 pages and attempting to justity the material we withheld. Some

seventy percent of the released material contains redactions, although later in the briefing we noted that as our experience has

grown the redaction standards have evolved and now most material (up to eighty percent) is being released whole. Some 25

senior annuitants, working closely with a DO team led by Wickham, have been performing the initial review. Pereira pointed

out that we are not only reviewing the assassination records, but those records bearing on the House Assassinations

Committee's investigation of the assassination. Pereira identified the five academic historians who make up the Board, and

said they are supported by 30 full-time Board staffers headed by former Berlin Documentation Center chief David Marwell.

CL BY

(620119

CL REASON 1.5C

DECL ON

X1

DRV FM HUM 4-82

SECRET

---

## Page 19

13-00000

SECRET

Page

2

WTC/Memorandum for the Record

(KEY: C/96-05677)

Pereira said that the 1992 Act specifies that the Board must have "clear and convincing evidence" if we want to postpone

release, and said that the Board requires "current justification" if we want to protect agent identities, sources and methods, or

liaison identities. Under the law, the Board has the authority to release all information, and must justify in the Federal Register

within 14 days any redactions. The Board sees the full text of all documents. Pereira said that we negotiate with the Board

the use of summaries or generic descriptions (such as substituting "a northern European station" for Helsinki) and that the

Board is making an "honest effort" to see the connection between 30 year old information and current damage to Agency

equities. Dupart asked rhetorically whether the Board understood the concept of ongoing liaison, with Wickham saying that

the Board clearly had a different perspective from the DO, and that the ADDO, General Counsel, Cover Staff and others have

briefed the Board in detail to address this "problem." Harrelson pointed out that our joint teltaps had recorded Oswald himself?

although we assured the clearly unhappy Dupart that we are trying to protect the fact that liaison cooperated in the teltaps. We

also noted our effort to protect the identities of covert Agency employees, although we are working particularly hard in cases

where the Agency employees now reside overseas. Pereira said we are concemed about the cumulative erosive effect on our

cover and our ability to conduct operations. He noted that the Board tends to focus on individual specific cases without always

focusing on the broader cumulative impact of their discrete decisions. (S)

2. (Cipriani described the appeals process specified in the 1992 JFK Act. She also lent Sheehy a copy of the act, which he

studied carefully during the briefing. Under the 1992 act, documents related to JFK carry the "presumption of release," with the

Board defining which records fall under the act. We have to justify any redactions or postponements, and Board decisions can

only be appealed to the President himself (which, as Cipriani dryly noted, tends to inhibit appeals.) The act also specifics very

short deadlines, with only 30 days for the President to make his decision. (This means we have only about seven days to get

our appeals out of Has and to the White House--a practical impossibility.) Our only appeal to date involved three issues: (i) a

cable implicating senior Mexican officials in our joint teltaps, (ii) the identification of the very sensitive Helsinki Station, and (i)

the identity of a Nicaraguan source. In fact our appeal took several months, with the Board being very accommodating about

the delay, and we finally were able to give the Board enough justification and explanation that they changed their position and

spared the White House the decision. Healey noted that the Agency declassification team includes a DO team (as noted

above,) and asked why we hadn't been able to head off the problem. Cipriani responded that new information arises for the

Board to consider in making its determination, and Wickham elaborated by noting that the DO is reluctant to reveal sensitive

current information to protect old material. He characterized this as a problem of "DO culture." At the same time, he cited the

specific example of the Mexicans declining to meet the DCI on his recent Latin American trip as illustrative of Mexican 3

(sensitivity to the liaison issue. We later noted that the only other appeal thus far involves the FBI, and the White House has

told the Bureau to resolve the matter with the Board. (S)

3. Pereira noted to the staffers that we're dealing with very short deadlines involving enormous volumes of material, and

illustrated by showing the staff a bulky recent Board declassification notification which we must review to confirm we have no

problem with the material involved. In response to a Sheehy question, Harrelson reminded staff that the original redaction and

submission to the Board took place in 1992-3, and as noted above, our redaction standards and judgements have evolved

since then. Further, we have to double-check each release to confirm we concur, and in some cases compare substitute

language. Sheehy asked why we would object to such a thing as the acknowledgment of Tokyo Station, and seemed

impressed and persuaded when Wickham patiently explained that both the Japanese and Ambassador Mondale /have strongly

recommended against confirming the existence of the Station. The Japanese are very sensitive to any public

acknowledgment of our liaison relationship. Wickham noted that the Board is trying to document Oswald's travels, and wants

to identity stations reporting such travel. Pereira said that we recognize the need to report the facts, but want to protect details

SECRET

---

## Page 20

13-00000

SECRET

Page

3

WTC/Memorandum for the Record

(KEY: C/96-05677

that do not add to the story but harm our equities. In response to a Healey question, Pereira said we are making progress in

giving the Board staff the context and framework necessary to appreciate and support our concerns. He said the staff tries

very hard to give the Board necessary background, and Wickham seconded Pereira's assessment that we have a very good

working relationship with the staff. Under the provisions of the Act, the Board will be working until October 1997, dealing with

CIA, FBI, DepState, as well as private individuals and even foreign governments. They are interviewing people, and as

Pereira noted, "getting theories." (S)

4. Staff, even those who asked pointed questions like Healey and Sheehy, seemed satisfied. Majority Staffer Eberwein,

perhaps reflecting concerns voiced by Deputy Majority Director Dupart about protecting Agency sources and methods,

however, expressed concern later about possibly amending the '92 act to moderate the act's bias toward release. Indeed, she

contacted OCA lawyer Cindy Ellis/and asked her to draft language amending the act. It had not been my impression during

the briefing that staff had been especially concerned about the act to the point of intending to modify it, and its also unclear

whether Eberwein was acting on behalf of senior majority staff or the membership in asking OCA to suggest modifications to

the act. (S)

Richard E. Schroeder: (C)

CIA Liaison Group/

Office of Congressional Affairs

DCIOCA/CLG/RESchroeder:dms/39940 (15 Apr 96)

Distribution:

Original - OCA Records

1 - D/OCA

1 - DCI/CSI

1 - DO/IMS

1 - DO/ORMS/CAG

1 - DCI/OGC

1 - RESchroeder Chrono

There were no Action Items on file for this event.

- (FOLLOW-UP ACTION ITEMS) -

SECRET

---

## Page 21

13-00000

EVENT: STAFF BRIEFING

PLACE: H-405 CAPITOL

FOR : HPSCI

SUBJ: JFK ASSASSINATION DOCUMENTS

SECRET

DATE: 04/10/96 TIME: 1030

STATUS : X -

KEY: ,C/96-05677

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: (RICHARD SCHROEDER - SECURE: 3-9940

---> (PARTICIPANTS) <---

ASSOC

NAME

ROLE

STAFF

STAFF

STAFF

STAFF

STAFF

STAFF

STAFF

CIA

CIA

CIA

CIA

CIA

BARTON, CHRISTOPHER (HPSCI)

DUPART,

LOUIS H. (HPSCI)

EBERWEIN, CATHERINE D. (HPSCI)

HEALEY, LOUISE CHRISTINE (HPSCI)

LOWENTHAL, MARK M. (HPSCI)

OUELLETTE, SUSAN MARY (HPSCI)

SHEEHY, MICHAEL WILLIAM (HPSCI)

CIPRIANI, LINDA (DCI/OGC)

HARRELSON, BARRY (DCI/CSI).

PEREIRA, JOHN (DCI/CSI)

(SCHROEDER, RICHARD (DCI/OCA)

WICKHAM, FRED (DO/IMS)

BRFR

BRER

BRER

SPRT

BRER

---

## Page 22

13-00000

EVENT: STAFF BRIEFING

PLACE: H-405 CAPITOL

FOR: HPSCI

SUBJ: JFK ASSASSINATION DOCUMENTS

SECRET

DATE: 04/10/96

TIME: 1030

STATUS: X

-

KEY: C/96-05677

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: (RICHARD SCHROEDER - SECURE: 3-9940

---> (PARTICIPANTS) <---

ASSOC

NAME

ROLE

STAFF

STAFF

STAFF

STAFF

STAFF

STAFF

STAFF

CIA

CIA

CIA

CIA

CIA

BARTON, CHRISTOPHER (HPSCI)

DUPART, LOUIS H. (HPSCI)

EBERWEIN, CATHERINE D. (HPSCI)

HEALEY, LOUISE CHRISTINE (HSCI)

LOWENTHAL, MARK M. (HPSCI)

OUELLETTE, SUSAN MARY (HPSCI)

SHEEHY, MICHAEL WILLIAM (HPSCI)

(CIPRIANI, LINDA] (DCI /OGC)

HARRELSON, BARRY (DCI/CSI)

PEREIRA, JOHN (DCI/CSI)

(SCHROEDER, RICHARD) (DCI/OCA)

WICKHAM, FRED (DO/IMS)

BRFR

BRER

BRFR

SPRT

BRER

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Following a telephone conversation with HPSCI staff in which

HRG/CSI noted a number of JFK assassination declassification

issues (see OCA C/96-05672 of 27 Mar 96,) CSI, DO, and OGC

briefed staff on the status of the JFK declassification

effort, the 1992 law which established the JFK Assassination

Records Review Board and the scope of the Board's authority,

and the details of some current declassification issues we

have been addressing with the Board.

We noted the close

working relationship between the Agency and the Board, and

said that the Board staff is trying to understand the

Agency's equities and perspectives. Some staff expressed

concern about the Board's broad powers and authorities under

the 1992 law, particularly regarding declassification of

intelligence material bearing on identities, sources, and

methods.

(S)

SUPPORTING TEXT:

1. C/CSI/Historical Review Group Pereira opened by briefly

describing the nature of the CIA JFK material. The open-

ended "Oswald 201" also includes material gathered later,

and the "sequestered file" is that material that was

---

## Page 23

13-00000.

...

assembled for the JFK assassination investigations.

All is

being processed for declassification, with some 227,000

pages already released.

Some seventy percent of the

released material contains redactions, although later in the

briefing we noted that as our experience has grown the

redaction standards have evolved and now most material (up

to eighty percent) is being released whole.

Some 25 senior

annuitants, working closely with a DO team led by Wickham,

have been performing the initial review.

Pereira pointed

out that we are not only reviewing the assassination

records, but those records bearing on our own investigation

of the

assassination.

Pereira identified the five academic

historians who make up the Board, and said they are

supported by thirty full-time Board staffers headed by

former Berlin Documentation Center chief David Marwell.

Pereira said that the 1992 Act specifies that the Board must

have "clear and convincing evidence" if we want to postpone

release, and said that the Board requires "current

justification" if we want to protect agent identities,

sources and methods,

or liaison identities. Under the law,

the Board has the authority to release all information, and

must justify in the Federal Register within fourteen days

any redactions.

The Board sees the full text of all

documents.

Pereira said that we negotiate with the Board

the use of summaries or generic descriptions (such as

substituting "a northern European station" for Helsinki) and

that the Board is making an

"honest effort" to see the connection between thirty year

old information and current damage to Agency equities.

Dupart asked rhetorically whether the Board understood the

concept of ongoing liaison, with Wickham saying that the

Board clearly had a different perspective from the DO, and

that the ADDO, General Counsel, Cover Staff and others have

briefed the Board in detail to address this "problem."

Harrelson pointed out that our Goint teltaps had recorded

(Oswald himself, although we assured the clearly unhappy

Dupart that we are trying to protect the fact that Liaison

(cooperated in the teltaps. We also noted our effort to

protect the identities of

covert Agency employees, although

we are working particularly hard in cases where the Agency

employees now reside overseas. Pereira said we are

concerned about the cumulative erosive effect on our cover

and our ability to conduct operations. He noted that the

Boards tends to focus on individual specific cases without

recognizing the

broader cumulative impact of their discrete

decisions.

(S)

2.

Cipriani described the appeals process specified in the

1992 JKF Act.

She also lent Sheehy a copy of the act, which

he studied carefully during the briefing. Under the 1992

act, documents related to JFK carry the "presumption of

release," with the Board defining which records fall under

the act.

We have to justify any redactions or

postponements, and

Board decisions can only be appealed to

---

## Page 24

13-00000

... .

the President himself (which, as Cipriani/ dryly noted, tends

to inhibit appeals.) The act also specifics very short

deadlines, with only 30 days for the President to make his

decision.

(This means we have only about seven days to get

our appeals out of Hqs and to the White House--a practical

impossibility.) Our only appeal to date involved three

issues:

(i) a cable implicating senior Mexican officials in

(our joint teltaps), (ii) the identification of the very

sensitive (Helsinki) Station,

and (iii) the identity of a

Nicaraguan source. In fact our appeal took several months,

with the Board being very accommodating about the delay, and

we finally were able to give the Board enough justification

and explanation that they changed their position and spared

the White House the decision.

Healey noted that the Agency

declassification

team

includes a DO team (as noted above,)

and asked why we hadn't been able to head off the problem.

Cipriani responded that new information arises for the Board

to consider in making its determination, and Wickham

elaborated by noting that the DO is reluctant to reveal

sensitive current information to protect old material.

He

characterized this as a problem of "DO culture."

At the

same time, he cited the specific example of the Mexicans

/declining to meet the DCI on his recent Latin American trip

las illustrative of Mexican sensitivity to the liaison issue.

We later noted that the only other appeal thus far involves

the FBI, and the White House has told the Bureau to resolve

the matter with the Board. (S)

3.

Pereira noted to the staffers that we're dealing with

very short deadlines involving enormous volumes of material,

and illustrated by showing the staff a bulky recent Board

declassification notification which we must review to

confirm we have no problem with the material involved.

no probien vath

In

response to a Sheehy question, Harrelson reminded staff that

the original redaction and submission to the Board took

place in 1992-3, and as noted above, our redaction standards

and judgements have evolved since then. Further, we have to

double-check each release to confirm we concur, and in some

cases compare substitute language.

would object to such a thing as the acknowledgement of (Tokyo

station, and seemed impressed and persuaded when Wickham

patiently explained that both the Japanese and Ambassador

(Mondale) have strongly recommended against confirming the

existence of the station.

The Japanesel are very sensitive

o any public acknowledgement of our liaison' relationship.

Wickham noted that the Board is trying to document Oswald's

travels, and wants to identify stations reporting such

travel.

Pereira said that we recognize the need to report

the facts, but want to protect details that do not add to

the story but harm our equities.

In response to a Healey

question,

Pereira said we are making progress in giving the

Board

staff the context and framework necessary. to

appreciate and support our concerns.

He said the staff

tries very hard to give the Board necessary background, and

---

## Page 25

13-00000

Wickham seconded Pereira's assessment that we have a very

good working relationship with the staff.

Under the

provisions of the act, the Board will be working until

October 1997, dealing

with CIA, FBI, DepState, as well as

private individuals and even foreign governments. They are

interviewing people, and as Pereira noted, "getting

theories."

4.

Staff,

even those who asked pointed questions like

Healey and Sheehy, seemed satisfied. Majority staffer

Eberwein, perhaps

reflecting concerns voiced by deputy

majority director Dupart about protecting Agency sources and

methods, however, expressed concern later about possibly

amending the '92 act to moderate the act's bias toward

release.

Indeed, she contacted OCA lawyer Cindy Ellis and

It had not

been my impression during the briefing that staff had been

Richard E. Schroeder

DCI /OCA/CLG

15 April 1996

Distribution: DCI/CSI

DO/ORMS

DO /IMS

OCA

RES chrono

RES

CL BY (620119

CL REASON 1.5C

DECL ON X1

DRV FM HUM 4-82

SECRET

---

## Page 26

13-00000

SECRET

TO:

FROM:

DATE:

(Richard E. Schroeder-C-

(Linda C. Cipriani"

04/15/96 05:30:04 PM

SUBJECT: [Re: DRAFT--OCA MFR on 10 Apr 96 HPSCI JFK Docs Brief

Looks OK to me - I was especially pleased to read that the staff was concerned about the the presumption for release in the Act and

asked Cindy Ellisito draft language modifying the act. If Cindy needs any help, I would be very happy to give her some suggestions!!

I would greatly appreciate being kept informed as this progresses.

Thanks Linda

CC:

John Pereira, J. Barry Harrelson, Fred Wickham @ DO, Linda Cipriani

SECRET

---

## Page 27

13-00000

SECRET

TO:

Richard E. Schroeder-C.

FROM:

John F. Pereira

DATE:

04/16/96 02:40:06 PM

SUBJECT: [Re: DRAFT-OCA MFR on 10 Apr 96 HPSCI JFK Docs Brief

The MFR looks basically fine.

Two minor suggestions:

Par 1. - change "our own investigation" to the House Assassinations Committee's investigation

Par 1, last sent. - change last part of sent to read without always focusing on the broader cumulative impact of their discrete

decisions.

CC:

J. Barry Harrelson

SECRET

---