DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY

• Document Type: FOIA
• Collection: FOIA Collection
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 06768784
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 7
• Document Creation Date: March 8, 2023
• Document Release Date: April 24, 2019
• Case Number: F-2014-02320
• Publication Date: July 10, 1964

Approved for Release: 2019/04/18 C06768784
10 July 1964
MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
SUBJECT: Delegation of Authority
1. This memorandum is for information only.
2. Attached is a detailed memorandum on what can be
delegated by you to the Executive Director-Comptroller. In short,
iwe believe the Director cannot delegate the authority to terminate
V employees or his authority to serve on the Atomic Awards Board
(which has never been invoked). We believe the Deputy Director
/annot delegate the authority to certify expenditures of a confidential,
extraordinary, or emergency nature under section 8(b) of the Central
Intelligence Agency Act. The authority to provide, with concurrence
of the Attorney General and the Commissioner of Immigration and
"'Naturalization, for entry of up to 100 aliens a year into the United
States should not be delegated without the concurrence of the Attorney
General. The authority of the Director to make joint recommenda-
tions with the Atomic Energy Commission for the removal of informa-
tion from the Restricted Data category is probably not delegable
v below the ;Deputy Director and in any case would require the con-
currence of the Atomic Energy Commission and possibly the Attorney
General. The authority to exempt from registration persons in-
structed or assigned in the espionage or sabotage service of a
foreign country is not delegable without the approval of the Attorney
General. All the other authorities, primarily those administrative
authorities in sections 4, 5, and 8 of the CIA Act, are delegable
to the Executive Director-Comptroller and some could be delegated
further down. Under HR 230-1 and three memoranda from you in
late 1963, control of the budgetary processes and project approval
are basically retained in the DDCI. Delegation to Deputy Directors
of $100,000 in the case of the DD/P and $150, 000 in the case of
R&D activities was made, but it had been the policy for a number
of years to require projects in excess of $100,000 to come to the
DCI or DDCI for approval. I suggest this policy is a prudent one
in answer to congressional and other charges of inadequate funds
Approved for Release: 2019/04/18 C06768784
Approved for Release: 2019/04/18 C06768784
control. Also, I should think you might want to have control in
this manner of expenditures which you may later have to certify
to under section 8 of the CIA Act.
LAWRENCE R. HOUSTON
General Counsel
Attachment
cc: Executive Director-Comptroller
Approved for Release: 2019/04/18 C06768784
Approved for Release: 2019/04/18 C06768784
Executive Registry
OGC 64-3036
10 JUL 1964
MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
SUBJECT: Delegations of Authority to Executive
Director-Comptroller
I. You have requested our advice as to the authority for
delegating to the Executive Director-Comptroller authorities now
exercised only by the DCI and DDCI.
2. As you know, in early 1962 considerable work was done by
this Office, in consultation with other Government agencies con-
cerned, looking to the delegation by the DCI to the DDCI of the
greatest possible range of authority. As a result of that study,
the DCI, by memorandum of 2 April 1962, delegated to the DDCI
flan authorities vested in me by law or by virtue of my position as
Director of Central Intelligence and head of the Central Intelligence
Agency, including, but not limited to, the certification authority
set forth in Section 8(b) of the Central Intelligence Agency Act of
1949, as amended, except for any authorities the delegation of which
is prohibited by law. " This Office has taken the position that the
only "authorities the delegation of which" by the DCI is prohibited,
are:
(a) The authority under Section 102c of the National
Security Act of 1947 to terminate employees of the CIA
when the DCI shall deem such termination necessary or
advisable in the interest of the United States; and
(b) Authority under the Atomic Weapons Rewards
Act of 1955 for the DCI to serve on the Atomic Awards Board,
empowered to render awards for information concerning cer-
tain activities regarding atomic energy. (There has been no
use of this authority since its enactment.)
Approved for Release: 2019/04/18 C06768784
Approved for Release: 2019/04/18 C06768784
3. All other authorities of the DCI are considered delegated
by the April 2 memorandum. These included specifically the
authority to certify expenditures of a confidential, extraordinary,
or emergency nature under Section 8(b) of the Central Intelligence
Act of 1949; the power to provide, with the concurrence of the
Attorney General and the Commissioner of Immigration and
Naturalization, for the entry into the United States for permanent
residence of up to 100 persons a year without regard to their inad-
missibility under any other law; the authority of the DCI to make
joint determinations with the Atomic Energy Commission for the
removal from the restricted data category of the information
regarding the Atomic Energy Commission programs of other
nations provided for in Section 142(e) of the Atomic Energy Com-
mission Act of 1954; the authority in Section 2 of the Internal
Security Act of 1950 to exempt from registration persons who
have been instructed or assigned in the espionage, counter-
espionage or sabotage service of a foreign country or political
party; and the administrative authorities in Sections 4, 5 and 8 of
the CIA Act of 1949.
4. The delegation to the DDCI of authority to certify expendi-
tures of a confidential, extraordinary, emergency nature under
Section 8(b) of the CIA Act represented a change in the practice
theretofore followed. In working out this change with the Comp-
troller General, the latter based his ruling on the fact that the
position of the DDCI was established by legislation and the incum-
bent was intended to substitute for and assist the DCI. In approving
the delegation of authority concerning the admission of 100 persons,
the Attorney General in the same manner relied on the statutory
basis of the position of the DDCI and its inherent functions. Thus,
further delegation of these functions to the Executive Director-
Comptroller would seem inappropriate to the philosophy of the
rulings by the Comptroller General and the Attorney General. It
would follow that redelegation of all the other authorities delegated
by the DCI memorandum of April 1962 (paragraph 3 above), except
the administrative authorities of Sections 4, 5, and 8 of the CIA
Act, would be barred by the reasoning above.
5. We believe there is no legal bar to the delegation of these
administrative authorities, which concern travel, health and medical
Approved for Release: 2019/04/18 C06768784
Approved for Release: 2019/04/18 C06768784
services, and expenditures for the purposes specified in Section
8(a) of the CIA Act (copy attached), to the Executive Director-
Comptroller or to the DD/S, or to subordinate officials. Many
functions under these sections in fact have been so delegated by
regulation or otherwise. It might be in order, however, to study
the desirability of further delegations thereunder, and we would
be glad to submit suggestions in that area.
6. Under HR 230-1 and three DDCI memoranda of late 1963
to Deputy Directors, effective control of the budgetary process
and the system of project approval is retained in the DDCI. Certain
projects and activities may be approved by Deputy Directors, namely
those involving expenditures of not more than $100,000, in the case
of the DD/P, or not more than $150,000, in the case of R&D activi-
ties (including those within the responsibility of the DD/P), and any
which would involve a significant new policy consideration or for
any other reason suggests the desirability of prior consideration
at head-of-Agency level. While the standards for projects which
require DDCI approval could be different from those we have adopted,
we believe the existence of the confidential funds authority and the
Comptroller General's view that it be exercised at least by the DDCI
argue that the standards established are prudent ones. Also, I
believe the $100,000 level has been the standard followed for a
number of years.
LAWRENCE R. HOUSTON
General Counsel
cc: Executive Director -Comptroller
Approved for Release: 2019/04/18 C06768784
Approved for Release: 2019/04/18 C06768784
MEMORANDUM FOR: THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR
Attached are our conclusions on the
delegation problem. If you tell us what you wish
we will be glad to draft the necessary delegation
paper.
LAWRENCE R. HOUSTON
General Counsel
10 July 1964
(DATE)
FORM NO. 101 REPLACES FORM 10-101
1 AUG 54 WHICH MAY BE USED.
(47)
Approved for Release: 2019/04/18 C06768784
Approved for Release: 2019/04/18 C06768784
2 APR 1962,
e
1 eby nelegate to the ity Director of Central
Intelligence all aldherities vested in bV law or by virtu f
V
itien .43irseter of Central Inteillisencezut head of the Central
Intelligence .444g013PY6 inerk2
t2et limited the certificatiota
authority set .ferth Ii sectiOn g(ti) a the Central Intelligence 4gency
of 049, ansended, exce ier any authoriti the delegation
of Xlich i 4td by
Igatiens of authority currently in force
eeziain valid to the ett- they are not siatent with this
delegatitiga.
'igneell, JOHN A, MGCOKB
./TOtiN A. WeCaVE
Director of Central lutelligeace
:DGC:11.113::Jeb
tribution
O&1-DL/
1- DCI
I,- mat
ER.
1-DD/P
1-D /IR
1.Genera1 Counsel
Approved for Release: 2019/04/18 C06768784