LETTER: DEAR DAVID: WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT
Agency: CIA
Originator: CIA
From: MR. DAVID MARWELL. ARRB
To: JOHN F. PEREIRA. HRG
Document date: 3/10/95
Document type: PAPER - TEXTUAL DOCUMENT

## Page 1

Date: 03/09/05

JFK ASSASSINATION SYSTEM

IDENTIFICATION FORM

AGENCY. INFORMATION

AGENCY : CIA

RECORD NUMBER

: 104-10330-10005

RECORD

SERIES

JFK

AGENCY FILE NUMBER

PROJFILES - CORRESPONDENCE

DOCUMENT INFORMATION

Released under the John

F. Kennedy

Assassination Recorda

Collection Act of 1992

144 USC 2107 Note) .

Case#:NW 53217 Date:

06-22-2017

AGENCY ORIGINATOR : CIA

FROM

: JOHN F. PEREIRA. HRG

TO

MR. DAVID MARWELL. ARRB

TITLE

LETTER: DEAR DAVID: WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO

COMMENT

03/10/1995

DATE

PAGES

SUBJECTS :

JFK ASSASSINATION

ARRB REGS

DOCUMENT TYPE :

PAPER

CLASSIFICATION

UNCLASSIFIED

RESTRICTIONS

: 1A

CURRENT STATUS : RELEASED IN PART PUBLIC - RELEASED WITH DELETIONS

DATE

OF LAST REVIEW

: 01/21/03

COMMENTS: JFK-M-15: F2: 2000.02.01.12:28:36:640054

IR] - ITEM IS RESTRICTED

104-10330-10005

NIH 53217

DocId: 32403996

Page 1

---

## Page 2

•CENTER for the STUDY of INTELLIGENCE

10 March 1995

Mr. David Marwell

Executive Director

Assassination Records

Review Board

600 E Street, N.W.

Washington, DC

20004

Dear David,

We appreciate the opportunity

to comment on the

Assassination Records Review Board's proposed interpretive

regulations as published in the Federal Register, February

8, 1995.

Ne recognize the value of providina quidance for

those who are responsible for implementing the Assassination

Records Collection Act.

Our general view is that the regulations are

comprehensive in identifying the range of records

that would

potentially be relevant to the JFK assassination or the

scope of the investigations into the assassination.

In a

few sections of the regulations the wording seems

somewhat overly broad or the meaning is not clear: Attached

for the Board's consideration are comments on these

sections:

In some parts of the text we suggest possible

changes in wording for purposes of clarification. Our

Office of General. Counsel has provided some legal comments

on the scope of the definition, which we have included in

the attached.

We would be pleased to discuss these comments at the

Board's convenience.

It is our intention to continue

cooperating fully with the Board and to make every effort to

release assassination records held by the Agency.

Johe 7. Perain

John F. Pereira

Historical Review Group,

Central Intelligence Agency

Attachments

NH 53217 DocId: 32402990tellEageor

• Washinotan 6. 20505 : (703) 351-2698 Far 17031 983-9243

---

## Page 3

1.

General Comment: The Act authorized the Board to

issue interpretive regulations.

Interpretive regulations,

while entitled to great deference, cannot be inconsistent

with the congressional intent to cover only certain specific

activities.

Rather, they should stay within the clearly

articulated definitions provided by congress.

This is

particularly important with respect to definition of

assassination records" since the Assassination Records

Collection Act (ARCA) has an overriding effect on other

statutory grants of power found necessary in the interest of

national security, such as the National Security Act's

direction that the Director of Central Intelligence protect

intelligence sources and methods from unauthorized

disclosure.

The ARCA provides a statutory standard for

protecting or "postponing" intelligence sources and methods

that can be protected in "assassinations records."

The

Review Board is given the ultimate authority to apply that

standard, subject to being overridden only by the President.

Thus, the ARCA reflects a congressional desire to limit the

DCI's authority to protect sources and

methods, but only for

"assassination records" as ARCA defined it. An interpretive

definition by the Board that would sweep in records not

covered by the Act, we believe, would exceed the Board's

limited rulemaking authority.

Thus, the proposed definition

should be limited more

clearly to those records identified

by Congress as "assassination records."

53217

Dooid: 32403996

Page

3

---

## Page 4

2.

Following are comments on specific sections of the

Assassination Records Review Board's interpretive

regulations, as published in the Federal Register,

February 8, 1995.

a .

Section 1400.1 Interpretation of Assassination

Record

In paragraph (a) the reference to "activities

and events that may have led to the

assassination--"seems overly broad, and appears

to go beyond the limits established in the

Assassination Records Collection Act.

We

believe that it would be helpful to include an

articulable standard in this section.

The

present text would permit inconsistent

application of the regulations, which might

encourage massive and expensive, additional

records searches that are of doubtful value.

The following change is suggested in

paragraph (a):

"activities and events that may reasonably be

considered to have led to the assassination--"

(This would be consistent with the Act.)

D.

Section 1400.2 Interpretation of additional

records and information

Paragraph (a) raises a question as to the

purpose and definition of "additional records

and information."

The meaning of the phrase

"all documents used--during declassification

review of assassination records as well as all

other documents--"seems overly broad and

unclear.

As presently worded, this section

would appear to include any document, book,

index, record system, etc. regardless of

relevance to the assassination or

investigations, including for example, legal

opinions.

We assume that the purpose is to

enable the Board to request and review

additional

records.

2

HH 53217

DooId: 32403996

Page

4

---

## Page 5

We suggest that the section be made more

specific, including a clearer statement of the

intent.

For example, with respect to

cryptonyms, codewords, guides, etc. a more

precise link to events related to the

assassination or to a timeframe could be

helpful.

Section 1400.5 Requirement that assassination

records be released in their entirety

The

introductory paragraph specifies that "no

portions of any assassination record shall be

withheld--solely on grounds of non-relevance."

This appears to open the door for access to

entire documents that contain information on

sensitive activities even when the documents

contain information that is only incidental to

the assassination, such as a passing reference

to a

name.

There is a potential risk that

sensitive, non-relevant sources and methods

would be compromised.

We suggest that the Board consider adding wording

to this section that accommodates those instances

when there is a need to release ample information

from a document to disclose assassination-related

material, while still protecting obviously

unrelated, sensitive information. The Board, of

course, would continue to have access to the

entire record.

d. Section 1400.7 Additional guidance

Paragraph (d) states "any records identified

with respect to a particular person also

includes any records for that person by any

other name, pseudonym, codeword," etc.

This

appears to require that all records on any

individuals who are merely mentioned in an

assassination record be made available.

We

assume that the purpose is more specific i.e.,

to assure that all files on an individual or

activity be made available regardless of the

labels on the files.

We suggest that the text

be modified to reflect this.

3

HH 53217 DocId:32403996 Page 5

---