LETTER TO HONORABLE GEORGE BUSH FROM BELLA ABZUG

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP78M02660R000300010012-2
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 8
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 4, 2004
• Sequence Number: 12
• Publication Date: April 2, 1976
• Content Type: LETTER

Ej.LA%.ABZUG,N.Y.,CHAIRApproved For Release 2004/10/12: CIA-RDP78M02660R00030001001g
_1- S IGER ARIZ.
LEO J. WYAH, t~.ALIP. CLARENCE J. GROWN, OHIO
JOHN CONYERS, JR., MICH. ~u~~ v ..nn...-..-.. -...-
JJHN E. MOSS, CALIF. .nv~.
MICHAEL HARRINGTON, MASS.
ANDREW MAGUIRE, N.J.
ANTHONY MOFFETT, CONN.
Honorable George Bush
Director
Central Intelligence Agency
Washington, D.C. 20505
OL C-71o-c19~
The Subcommittee on Government Information and Individual Rights
has legislative jurisdiction over the Privacy Act of 1974 and the
Freedom of Information Act, and over matters of government records
in general.
You are invited to testify at a hearing to be conducted by this
Subcommittee on April 13, 1976, on the subject of H.R. 169 and H.R. 12039,
which would amend the Privacy Act to require agencies to notify individuals
that certain improperly held files about them are maintained by the govern-
ment, and/or of their right to have such files expunged. The Attorney
General has also been invited to testify on that day on the subject of
the bills, and on the Department of Justice's recently announced program
to notify certain victims of COINTELPRO programs. The Attorney General
has also been asked to explain the Department's proposed plan to end
the 1975 moratorium and to resume the regular destruction of certain
Federal Bureau of Investigation records.
I wrote to you on this latter question on February 24 of this year.
I have received your March 8 reply, which leaves the matter unresolved.
I enclose for your convenience a copy of a Congressional Record insert
of March 30, 1976, containing my correspondence with several other agencies
on the destruction of files moratorium question.
We would like to have your views on whether CIA contemplates a
notification program similar to the Department of Justice's, and your
further views on an extension of the files destruction moratorium.
We will inquire into the nature and extent of files currently
maintained by CIA on some of the programs and activities covered by
QCongrea of the Nniteb 'tateo
JoiMe of 3tepregetttatibess
GOVERNMENT INFORMATION AND INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS
SUBCOMMITTEE
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING, Room B-349-8-C
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP78MO266OR000300010012-2
 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP78MO266OR000300010012-2
Honorable George Bush
April 2, 1976 Page 2
H.R. 12039; and your views on the applicability of sections (e)(1),
(5) and (7) of the Privacy Act of 1974 to these files.
We look forward to your testimony.
Please have your staff contact Subcommittee Staff Director Timothy
Ingram or Theodore Jacobs at 225-3741 if you have questions concerning
the hearing.
Sincerely,
BELLA S. ABZUG
Chairwoman
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP78MO266OR000300010012-2
 H 2-6. 8
E ~G arch, 30, 1976
Approved For ReleaseM0 NW. C1A=RUP78MMM0030001001A
mendations Involving. such natters as
stc, in;; training, computer systems
-management, et cetera. The subcommit-
tee will not discuss those recommenda-
tions Involving legislative change, since
these recommendations are under con-
sideration by the Ways and Means Pub-
lic Assistance. Subcommittee.
This hearing is the fourth in a series
being held at the request of Chairman
Uui lax and Acting Chairman CoR.Dmx of
the Public Assistance Subcommittee. The
hearing will be designed to- help meas-
ure the progress of the Social Security
Administration in improving the opera-
tion of the SSI program,
DESTRUCTION OF FILES OF ILLE-
GAL SURVEILLANCE AND OTHER
ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES: ANNOUNCE-
MENT OF HEARING
The SPEAKER pro tempore Under a
previous order of the House, the. gentle-
woman from New York (Ms. Aszuc) is
recognized for 20 minutes.
Ms. ABZUG. Mr. Speaker, the Govern-
ment Information and Individual Rights
Subcommittee, which I chair, has been
studying the maintenance, dissemina-
tion and ultimate disposition of files cre-
ated as a result of such programs as
CHAOS, COINTELPRO, IRS' Special
Service Staff, FBI and CIA mail open-
ings, and NSA interception of wire com-
munications. In addition, we have leg-
islative and oversight jurisdiction over
the Privacy Act of 1974.
In that connection, I have introduced
H.R. 12039, which would require that
individuals who were the subjects of
such programs be informed of the exist-
ence of files on them and afforded the
opportunity to require that such files be
turned over to them or destroyed. H.R.
12039 Is an expanded version of H.R. 169,
which I introduced in January 1975.
. By letter dated February 24, 1976.I
also requested that the CIA, the FBI,
the IRS, the NSA and other agencies
-having such material not destroy it on
their own. To begin with, It is the sub-
jects of the programs, not the agencies
which unlawfully conducted them, who
should have the right to determine the
disposition of files collected unlawfully.
In addition, it is important that the
material, which undoubtedly includes
-considerable evidence of illegal activi-
ties by the agencies, not be destroyed
before committees such as mine conclude
teir inquiries into these programs.
Today I received two letters from At-
torney General Levi, one striking a posi-
tive note, the other quite disappointing.
In the first, Mr. Levi informed me that,
on the request of syndicated columnist
Joseph Kraft, he has asked the National
Archives to destroy the content of the
electronic surveillance conducted against
Mr. Kraft in 1969 on the ground that the
continued maintenance of the informa-
tin violates the Privacy Act of 1974. Spe-
cifically, Mr. Levi ruled that the keeping
of the information violates the require-
meets that Federal agencies may only
maintain records on Individuals that are
The existence of the Kraft wiretap was'
made known by Watergate investigators,
but there are many thousands of Amer-
icans who are not even aware that their
Government opened their mail, tapped
their phones, or otherwise had them un-
der surveillance for doing nothing more
than exercising their constitutional
rights. These people have a right to be
informed of the existence of the files on
them so that they may exercise their
rights to have the files amended or de-
stroyed, and H.R. 12039 would go beyond
Mr. Levi's position by requiring that
they be so notified and informed of their
rights.
Mr. Levi's second letter relates to the
destruction of files generally. Now that
the Pike committee has completed its
work, albeit without its report having
been made public, and the Senate com-
Inittee chaired by Senator C1'IURCH is
about to conclude its investigation, the
Congress is presented with the question
of whether the moratorium which has,
been in effect on destruction of docu-
ments by the intelligence agencies
should he extended.
In January 1975, Senators. il,MANsFIxLD
and Scorn requested that various agen-
cies and departments not destroy or
otherwise dispose of documents which
might have a bearing on the work of the
Senate and House Intelligence Commit
tees.
The agreement reached by the Senate
leadership with the various agencies will only the documents containing or summariz-
expire shortly, and I believe that Con-' -ing the actual conceut of the surv 5_1iance,
gress should address the question of the
ultimate disposition of some of the sen-
sitive files and records held by these
agencies. I recently sent a letter to the
Departments of State, Justice, Treasury,
and Defense, and to the Central Intel-
ligence Agency, requesting that the
moratorium on destruction of files and
records be extended until Congress has
had an opportunity to act on legislation
dealing with this matter. The text of a
sample of the letter I sent and the re-
sponses of the agencies are appended
following my remarks.
The replies I received to my letters
to the agencies generally state that they
have complied with their agreement, that
they will "discuss the matter further"
with the congressional leadership, and
that any destruction will be done in ac-
cordance with Presidential order or as
otherwise provided by law. The Treasury
Department assures me that it has.
preserved the files and records -relating.
to its Special Service staff and the, se-
cret Service has presreved Its files and
records relating to the assassination of
the Government Information and Indi-
vidual Rights Subcommittee and other
committees. of the Congress.
In light of these developments, the
Government Information and Individual
Rights Subcommittee will hold hearings
on H.R. 12039, H.R. 169, and other mat-
ters relating to the disposition of the
records of the agency activities in que3-
tion, beginning on April 13, 1976. The
hearing will be in room 2217 of the Ray-
burn Building and will begin at 10 a.m.
My letter and the agency response are
appended:
OFFICE or TAE A'rroaNEY GENERAL,
Washington, D.C., March 20,19 76.
Han. BELI.A S. ABZUG,
Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Government
Information and Individual Rights,.Com,
mittee on Government Operations, U.S.
House of Representatives, Washington,
D.C.
DEAR CBAIawoMAN Aszoc: In light of your
interest In the preservation of certain rec-
ords of this Department, I thouigbt it ad-
visable to notify you of my request to the
Archivist to dispose of certain materials re-
lating to an electronic surveillance of, Joseph
Kraft In 1969.
Mr. Kraft has requested destruction of
these records pursuant to subsection (d) of
the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 532a(d). I
have determined that the records in question
may not properly be maintained by this
Department pursuant to that Act and must
therefore be destroyed or. if of historical
attached form 115, submitted to the Arch-
ives, notes, I am proposing that we destroy
not the documents which relate to the Ini-
tiation or termination of It. Much of the
material has already been furnished to the
Senate Select Committee and information
concerning the incident is contained L*a.the
files. Thus, the historic fact of the occur-
rence of the surveillance will be preserved,
not only in the lies of this Department but
also in the flies of the Senate Select Com-
mittee.
In my view destruction of the flies at this
time fulfills my obligations under the Pri-
vacy Act and yet remains consistent, with
your earlier request. .
Sincerely,- .
EOWABD H. Lzvr,
Attorney General.
REQUEST FOR Rrcoavs Dlsrosrno:2
Avraoarrr
(See Instructions on reverse)
(Leave blank.)
Job No.: NC 1-65-76-2.
Date received: March 3,19" 6.
Notification to agency: In accordance with
the provisions of 44 U.S.C. 3303a the disposal
request, including amendments, is approved.
except.for Items that may be stamped "dis-
posal not approved" or "withdrawn" in col-
umn 10.
Date:
Archivist of the United States
.
.
John K. Kennedy. I assume, in the ab- To: General Services Administration, Na-
sence of evidence to the contrary, that tional Archives and Records Service,
every other agency has kept the files Washington. D.C. 20401.
which comprise the subject of H.R. 12039. 1. From (agency or establishment) : De-
Mr. Levi's second letter states that he psrtment of Justice:
will "shortly authori:,e the resumption" 2. Major subdivision: Pederal Bureau of
of the FBI's "routine destruction pro- Investigation.
3. Minor subdivision: Files and Commnni-
gram." Mr. Levi also says that no "in- cations Division.
telligence files" are to be destroyed. I 4. ',Name of person with rhom to bonier:
do not question his good faith, but I Mary C. Lawton.
suspect that we may have some differ- 5. Tel. ext.: 2059.
ences as to what constitute "intelligence 6. Certificate of agency represe ntati.e. I
h
h
~
e
e
y certify that I s m ax:tao lzcd uc ace
relevant, timely, accurate, and complete, files," and that we may also differ on
and which do not describe how an In- the extent to which the files which he for this agency in agency's cords thet the
disposal of the agenncy''s record, t. the
dividual expresses rights guaranteed by does propose to destroy. contain eVI- records proposed for disposal in this Request
the first amendme~npproved For Release 204/1012 0/e C~A1 D 7 MOZ60~200030(~~ ea81 ~2not now needed for
 nl cr,rc:: _ s~,O, 19
.76ApprovedFor 'll c 2 qW 7 M6I RD00300010012-2 112569
the business of this agency or will not he
needed after the retention periods slroci-
fied.
(Xj A. Request for immediate disposal.
( ) B. Request for disposal after a speci-
fied period of time or request for permanent
retention.
C. Date : 3/8,176.
D Signature of agency representative:
E. Title: Attorney General.
7. Item no.: 1.
8. Description of item (with inclusive
dates or retention periods) : Contents of
sealed file which include 115 documents, 48
of which are original (some are classified
Top Secret) and 67 duplicates. The contents
were ordered removed from the general files
of the Federal Bureau of Investigation by
the Attorney General and Sealed. The ma-
terial relates to conversations overhead dur-
ing a 1969 electronic surveillance.
The sealed file consists of transcripts of
conversations and memoranda describing,
summarizing and transmitting product of
electronic surveillance. Documentation of
the Initiation, implementation and termin-
ation of electronic surveilaance project is
included in files that will be retained in the
FBI in its approved Records Control Sched-
ule. Continued maintenance of the records
covered by this disposal request conflicts
with the provisions of the- Privacy Act of
1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(1),(5) and (7).
9. Sample or job no. - .
10. Action taken.
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, .
Washington, D.C., March 29, 1976.
Hon. BELLA S. ABZUG,
Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Government
Information and Individual Rights, Com-
mittee on Government Operations, U.S.
House of Representatives, Washington,
D.C.
DEAR CHAlitwo_arAN ABzto: You have asked.
me to have the Federal Bureau of Investi-
gation refrain from destroying any material
that might be useful to a future Congres-
sional oversight committee. As you know, the
Bureau has, since the Senate leadership re-
quested a moratorium on destruction of files
January 27, 1975, refrained from destroying
any materials. It has done so in abundance
of good faith, but the logistical burden of
this policy has been very great, The Bureau,
with the concurrence (enclosed) of Senators
Hugh Scott and Mike Mansfield who made
the 1975 request, intends to renew its routine
destruction programs described in the at-
tached memorandum.
You will notice that no intelligence files are
sought to be destroyed. I believe the resump-
tion of the routine destruction program-
which is also consistent with Archival re-
quirements-will in no way impede the re-
sponsibilities - of Congressional oversight
committees and will result In a considerable
savings of money. I intend shortly to author-
ize the resumption of the destruction pro-
gram.
Sincerely,
EDWARD H. Levi,
Attorney General.
GovzsuaT_ENT INFORMATION AND
INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS SUBCOMMIT-
TEE o7 TIIE COMMITTEE ON Gov-
ERNMENT OPERATIONS,
Washington, D.C., March 30, 1976,
Pion. EDWARD H. Levi,
Attorney General of the United States,
U.S. Department of Justice,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. ATTORNEY GENERAL: Thank you
for your letter of March 29, 1976 in which
you inform me of your request that the Archi-
vist dispose of the content of the electronic
surveillance conducted In 1969 on the -col-
umnist, Joseph Kraft..
I am gratified that you have taken this
action, and want you to know that I agree
with your interpretation of Sections (e).(1),
(5) and (7) of the Privacy Act. This de-
cision, as far as I know, is the first interpret-
Ing these vital provisions of the Act.
On February 24, 1976, I introduced a bill.
H.R. 12039, - provide that the subjects of
several programs, including COINTELPRO,
be informed of the fact that they were sub-
jected to surveillance and giving them the
opportunity of having the file on them de-
stroyed. The programs or operations covered
by my bill include mail openings, illegal en-
tries, warrantless wiretaps, monitoring of in-
ternational communications, and the pro-
grams known as CHAOS and the Special Serv-
ice Staff of Internal- Revenue, as well as
COINTELPRO. I had previously, on Janu-
ary 14, 1975, introduced H.R. 169 to amend
.the Privacy Act to provide for expunging of
certain files.
I intend to hold hearings on H.R. 169, H.R.
12039 and related matters Involving records
of these activiies on'April 13, 1976. If possi-
ble, we would appreciate having your testi-
mony at that time. I would, of course, also
appreciate having your supportfor the bills.
Sincerely,
. .. BELLA S. ABZVO,
Chairwoman.
OFFICE OF THE MAJORITY LEADER,
Washington, D.C., March 24,1976.
Hon. CLARENCE M. KELLEY,
Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. DIRECTOR: You will recall that
we wrote to you on January 27, 1975, re-
questing "that you not destroy, remove from
.your possession or control or otherwise dis-.
pose of documents ." which might be
pertinent to the investigation which-was pro-
vided for by S. Res. 21: We are now advised
by Senator Church, as Chairman, that this
moratorium is broader than necessary at this
time.
Accordingly, we rescind our request of Jan-
uary 27, 1975, -to the' end that you may re-
sume the Bureau's routine records disposal
program. Our understanding is that the files
involved in that program do not relate to
security and intelligence matters.
. With appreciation for your cooperation, we
are
. Sincerely Tours,
MULE MANSFIELD,
Majority Leader.
HUGH SCOTT, '
Republican Leader.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL,
DIRECTOR, FBr,
U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLI-
GENCE ACTIVTTSEs:
Enclosed for your approval and forward-
ing to the committee is a letterhead memo-
randum outlining the FBI's recommendation
for the reinstitution of the Bureau's normal
file destruction program. A copy of this let-
terhead memorandum Is enclosed for your
records. This letterhead memorandum is in
response to Chairman Frank Church's re-
quest that the FBI obtain the concurrence
of you in the reinstitution of this program.
The request of Chairman Church was con-
tained in his letter to me dated February 20,
1976. A copy of this letter is enclosed as well
tion. The problems presented by the continu-
ing retention of the materials are such that I
ask that this matter be handled as expedi-
tiously as possible.
MARCH 4, 1976.
U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLI-
GENCE ACTIVITIES
Reference is made to the letter of. Chair-
man Frank Church to Honorable Clarence M.
Kelley, Director, Federal Bureau of Investiga-
tion, dated February 20, 1976, which re-
quested the Attorney General's concurrence
in the FBI's reinstitution of the destruction -
of certain FBI documents and files.
By letter to the Director of the FBI dated
January 27, 1975, from Senate Majority
Leader Mike Mansfield and Minority-Leader
Hugh Scott, the FBI was advised of the U.S.
Senate's intended investigation and study of .
intelligence activities by the FBI and other
Government agencies. The scope of this in-
vestigation and study was described in Sen-
ate Resolution 21 of the 94th Congress.
The aforementioned letter specifically re-
quested the FBI not to . destroy. or otherwise
dispose of any records or documents which
might have a bearing on the subjects under
investigation or relating to the matters spec-
ified in Section 2 of Senate Resolution 21
That Section of the Resolution described the
Senate's extensive interest in the domestic
intelligence as well as foreign counterintelli-
gence activities of Executive Branch agencies
including the FBI. .
In accommodation of that request, Direc-
tor Kelley immediately issued instructions to
all offices and divisions of the FBI estab-
lishing a moratorium on the destruction of
all records of whatever description. In retro-
spect, the FBI now feels that the moratorium,
need not have been as all-encompassing as
that, but this was done to assure that there
could be no question of its intention to com-
ply fully with the request with regard to
the preservation of relevant records in.which
the Senate might develop an interest.
It Is now more than one year since the in-
ception of the moratorium, on the FBI's
regular records destruction- program. For
your information, the FBI's regular destruc-
tion program, as-approved by the National
Archives and Records Service and the De-
partment of Justice, Is designed to prevent
retention of masses of records well beyond
the period during which- they may serve a
useful purpose. Further, our records destruc-
tion program, as approved by the National
Archivist, permits the destruction of those
records which are deemed to no longer
possess evidentiary, intelligence, or historical
value. The moratorium, which was not ex-
pect_d to last as long as it has. has created
substantial administrative burdens not only
at FBI Headquarters but throughout the 59
field offices. The suspension of sound records
management and file destruction practices
in many areas is causing very substantial
space and storage problems.
The FBI now proposes that that portion .
of its- records destruction programs which
do not pertain to or concern classifications
of files which would fall within the general
description of "security files" be reinstituted.
Those files which would not be affected by
the reinstitution of the file destruction pro-
gram would include all files on domestic In-
telligence matters, extremist matters, racial
matters as well as foreign counterintelligence
matters. The files which the FBI proposes to
as a copy of my letter to Chairman Church . resume routine destruction of In accordance
dated January 27, 1975. with its established records retention plan
All of the FBI's file destruction programs include the fol`owing: flies relating to crimi-
are approved by the National Archives and nal investigations; suitability or applicant-
Records Service as well as furnished to the type Investigations, correspondence files, and
Assistant Attorney General for Administra- files of an administrative nature generally.
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP78M02660R000300010012-2
 _H 2570 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE March 0-10, 1976
tZSPECT TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVI-
TIES,
Washington, D.C., February 20, 1976.
Hon, CLARENCE M. KELLEY,
Director,- Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR DIRECTOR KELLEY: I have considered
your letter of January 12, 1976, regarding the
request of the Majority Leader and the Mi-
nority Leader on January 27, 1975, that the
FBI not destroy any records which might
have a bearing on matters specified in Sen-
ate Resolution 21.
The Select Committee deeply appreciates
your instructions issued immediately after
the request establishing a moratorium on de-
struction of all FBI files of whatever descrip-
tion. We understand that this moratorium
has been costly and has produced substan-
tial administrative burdens.
Therefore, the Select Committee would
raise no objection to the resumption of de-.
struction of certain records which would
have no relationship whatsoever to the mat-
ters specified in S. Res. 21. We are concerned,
however, that resumption of routine destruc-
tion in accordance with your established
Records Retention Plan may result in de-
stroying materials which might be of use in
connection with the work of a future Sen-
ate committee engaged In oversight of the
FBI.
Consequently, we suggest that you confer
with the Attorney General so as to ensure
that he is satisfied that reinstitution of de-
struction under the Records Retention Plan
is consistent with his policies regarding the
availability of materials for future Congres-
sional oversight, as well as for effective su-
pervision of the FBI by the Attorney Gen-
eral.
I will be happy to recommend to the Ma-
jority Leader and Minority Leader that they
endorse resumption of records destruction,
upon receipt of notification that the Attor-
ney General has approved such destruction
after considering the concerns stated above.
Thank ydu again for your continued co-
operation. with the Select Committee.
Sincerely,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Washington, D.C., March 1, 1976.
Hon. BELLA S. ABZtlG,
Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Government
Information and Individual Rights, Com-
mittee on Government Operations, Ray-
burn House Office Building, Washington;
D.C.
DEAR MADAM CHAIRWOMAN: I have your
letter of February 24 which requests that the
moratorium on destruction of files and rec-
ords be extended "until such time as Con-
gress has had an opportunity to act on legis-
lation dealing with this matter." .
I have referred your letter to various offi-
cials in the Department of Justice for a fur-
ther analysis of the effects of such a. general
postponement: I realize that the postpone-
ment is related to investigations of the Pike
and Senate Select Committees, but this con-
stitutes a broad area. As soon as I have their
analysis and recommendations, I will write to
you again.
I do want to point out, however, that one
matter of special interest to the Edwards
Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Com-
mittee was the adoption of procedures for
the destruction of some material, and I
thought it was considerable progress when
our guidelines committee adopted as a mat-
ter of principle that there should be some
weeding out of files.
In addition, there are some instances where
retention of material might be opposed by
those who were the subject of the material.
As you know, the request that the Depart-
UntORA/W/9111 Cdktib ~7c2829?tgO0A0 000 1rUgepariment will continue to
came from the Senate leadership, and no preserve this type of files and records for
similar request was made by the House lead- the duration of the Senate, Select Commit-
ership? tee's tenure. Arrangements for the proper
Sincerely, disposition of Treasury Department files and
tees will be discussed with the Senate and
House leadership as appropriate, and the
destruction of any information will be made
in accordance with Presidential directives
and as otherwise provided by law.
Should the Subcommittee have any ques-
tions, they may be directed to Mr. J. Robert
MCBrlen, Office of the Secretary, our, liaison
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, GOV-
ERNMENT INFORMATION AND IN-
DIVIDUAL RIGHTS $OBcommITTEE
OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERN-
dENT OPERATIONS,
Washington, D.C., February 24, 1976.
Mr. GEORGE BIISH,
Director, Central Intelligence Agency,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. BUSH: This Subcommittee has
jurisdiction. of government information
policy, including the Privacy Act of 1974 and
the Freedom of Information Act.
As you know, during the inquiries con-
ducted by the House and Senate Select Com=mittees on Intelligence, your agency agreed
to refrain from destroying files and records
relating to their. Investigations. The Pike
Committee's tenure has expired and the
Church Committee will report shortly.
We write now to request that the mora-
torium, on destruction of files and records be
extended until such time as Congress has
had an opportunity to act on legislation
dealing with this matter.
Please affirm to this Subcommittee, within
10 days, that it is your intention to honor
the ban on destruction of data in accordance
with our request.
Sincerely,
BELLA-S. ABZIIG,
. Chairwoman.
THE GENERAL COUNSEL -
OF THE TREASURY,
Washington; D.C., March 4, 1976.
Hon. BELLA S. ARzuG,
Chairwoman, Government Information and
Individual Rights Subcommittee, Com-
mittee on Government Operations, House
of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MADAM CHAIRWOMAN: This' responds
to your letter of February 24, to the Secretary
requesting that the Treasury Department
continue to refrain from destroying files and
records of interest to the House and Senate
Select Committees on Intelligence until such
time as Congress has had an opoprtunity to
act on legislation in this area.
In January, 1975, the leadership of the
Senate requested that we not destroy records
or documents which might have a bearing
on the. subjects under. investigation.. The
Treasury Department complied with that
request with certain necessary. execptions of
which the Select Committee was made aware.
Those materials which have been excluded
from operation of the destruction embargo
include general tax related information of
the Internal Revenue Service, investigative
and protective intelligence flies of the Secret
Service, ..and criminal investigative files of
other law enforcement units of the Treasury
Department. The common bases for exempt-
ing these materials from the destruction em-
bargo are that they are normally destroyed
routinely in accordance with records disposal
schedules and that continued maintenance
of unnecessary files in these systems will in-
tr:rfere with the effective use of relevant law
enforcement and tax information and will
impose substantial records storage burdens.
In no case have we destroyed files or rec-
ords which we believed might be of interest
to the Inquiries of the Select Committees.
Thus, for example, the Internal Revenue
Service has preserved the files and records
relating to its Special Services Staff and the
Secret Service has preserved its files and
records relating to the investigation by the
Warren Commission of the assassination of
President John F. Kennedy.
with the Select Committees.
Sincerely,
_ RICHARD R. ALBRECHT,
General Counsel.
DEPARTMENT 07 STATE,
Washington, D.C., March 19, 1976.
Hon. BELLA S. ABZIIG,
Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Government
Information and Individual Rights,
House of Representatives, Washington,
D.C.
DEAR MADAME CHAIRWOMAN: Secretary Kis-
singer has asked me to respond to your let-
ter of February 24, 1976 in which you re-
quested that Department of State files re-
lating to the House and Senate Select Com-
mittee on Inelligence not be destroyed. -
In P. letter to the Secretary dated January
27, 1975 Senators Scott and Mansfield re-
quested that the Department not destroy or.
otherwise dispose of records or documents
which might have a bearing on the investiga-
tion conducted by the Senate Select Com-
mittee. We have complied with their request
and, at the appropriate time, intend to dis-
cuss the matter further with them.
It is .our position that the maintenance of
files and records, and their destruction shall
be governed by the appropriate laws and reg-
ulations.
Sincerely,
ROSERT J. MCCLOSKEY,
Assistant Secretary for Congressional
Relations.
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY,
Washington, D.C.,'larch 8, 1976.
Hon. BELLA S. AezuG,
Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Government
'Information and Individual Rights,
Committee on Government Operations,
House of Representatives, Washington,
D.C.
DEAR MADAME CHAIRWOMAN: This is in re-
sponse to your letter of 24 February 1976
regarding the disposition of CIA records
which are the subject of inquiry by the Sen-
ate and House Select Committees on Intel-
Vgence:
The moratorium on the destruction of
Agency documents as requested by Majority
Leader, Mike Mansfield, and Minority Leader,
Hugh Scott, by letter dated 27 January 1975
is still in effect and will be the subject of
discussion by the Agency with them.
Destruction of, Agency material will be In
accordance with Presidential directives and
as permitted by law. '
Sincerely,
GEORGE BUSH,
Director,
THE DEPOTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE.
Washington, D.C., March 5, 1976.
Hon. BELLA S. ABZUG,
Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Government
Information and Individual Rights,
Committee on Government Operations,
House of Representatives, Washington,
D.C.
DEAR Ms. CHAIRWOMAN: Secretary Rums-
feld has asked me to reply to your letters to
the Secretary and the Director, National
Security Agency regarding the moratorium
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP78MO266OR000300010012-2
 l9i 6Approved. For 1 wg9Q Mj2 ftpP. 72ff R000300010012-2 112571
on destruetion of files and records relating to at 40 percent. The remaining two coun- develop the technology,. we can continue
t"e investigations' of the Senate, and House ties each have an Independent registra- the research, we can expand. our future;
Select Committees on Intelligence.. - tion of 34 percent, we can maintain our standard of living-
The moratorium requested by senators
Mansfield and Scott It has been argued that any effort to but not if we vote for the moratorium.
the Department of f Defense remains Continues effect
to ac- and add people to the Commission from out- If the Post can vote "no," I guess I
cede to that request. Moreover, arrange- side the two major parties will serve to should. I urge you to read the Post edi-
ments have been made with. Representative further weaken the two-party structure. torial before you vote.
Pike to ensure, that the material that was I certainly do not -accept this argument I Insert the editorial at this place in
made available to the House Select. Commit. because I ardently support our two-party the RECORD:
tee on Intelligence will be preserved intact. system. Furthermore, I think that this VOTING ON Nvcazaa Poway
Wo also anticipate arrangements to that ef- argument belies the facts and statistics
feet will be worked out. with the Senate The California primary early in June- will
Select Committee on Intelligence. because figures -demonstrate that people have more of national interest to it this year
Sincerely, - are increasingly refusing. to identify than presidential politics. On the ballot is
ROBERT ELT-WORTH. themselves with any organized party. another of those proposals-this one known
The trend over the last 20 years shows as Proposition 15-with very broad implica??
that this is more than a passing phe tions. If it is adopted and subsequently held
FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN nomenon, and I believe we must face the constitutional, Proposition 15 may be the
ACT AMENDMENTS reality of the situation by recognisin death knell for nuclear power plants in Cali-
the existence of this large segment of the opponents And, if this turns out to be the case.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a of nuclear power are likely to re-
previous order of the House,.the-gentle-. American electorate. '. gard it as a signal that. voters and poliiticians
mail from Connecticut (Mr. DODD) ITI also believe that the Independent everywhere. can be persuaded that. such
recognized for 5 minutes. and unaffiliated voters make a healthy plants are too dangerous to be allowed.
Mr. DODD. Mr. Speaker, I rise in sup- contribution to our election process; and The campaign for Proposition 15 is not be-
port. Of H.R. 1240d, the Federal Election I think it is only just that we recognize lug cast in such sweeping terms. The pro.'
Campaign Act Amendments of 1976. In their participation by giving. them repre- posal on the ballot is called a Nuclear Safe-
recent years the American public has be- sentation within the system. It is for this guards Act and Is being promoted as a safety
that I offer amendment tomeasure or, at most, a moratorium on nu-
come justifiably disheartened and dish- reason clear plants until they meet certain safety
lusioned with the political process and in provide them representation _ on 'the standards. The trouble Is that the standards
dealing with this legislation they are Federal Election Commission.' are such that almost by definition they could
looking to ? the Congress to pass a bill - ? not be met. One, for instance, requires that
which will guarantee fair and-just ad- the state legislature, after a complicated
ministration of Federal campaign laws VOTING ON NUCLEAR POWER.- hearing process, determine by a two-thirds
and insure an'open election process. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a vote to each house that nuclear wastes can
e of of n that there is no reasonable
be For this reason I support the efforts previous order of the House, the gentle- chance stored
any of its radiation ever. escaping
of the House to reconstitute the. FEC man from California- (Mr. TAacorr) Is and hurting anyone or anything in Cali-
and plan to vote in favor of final passage. recognized for 5 minutes. fornia. Among the kinds of radiation escapes
However, the rule under which we are Mr. TALCOTT. Mr. Speaker, it is not to be considered are those that result from
considering this bill today will not per- often that I can applaud a Washington improper storage, earthquakes, theft, sabo-
mit me to offer an amendment I had Post editorial for commonsense, under- tage, acts of war or government or social in-
standing of faraway California issues, or stabilities. We don't' see how conscientious
planned to submit and I, therefore, legislators could vote that there was "no
would like to take this opportunity to special appreciation for future genera- reasonable chance" nuclear radiation from
explain my amendment which would add tions, When I can, I must; and I there- such wastes could not escape during, say,'a
two independent commissioners to the fore applaud and recommend for your, war or revolution.
six partisan FEC commissioners already consideration the editorial of March 27, The real Issue, then, on the California bal
provided for in this bill. 1976, entitled "Voting on Nuclear Pow- lot is a yes or no to nuclear power plants.
Let us remember that the purpose of er." Proposition 15 is designed to impose' That, in our view, Is not only too simple and
this, bill is to insure the integrity of the a moratorium on nuclear powerplants stark a question to pose, it is also the wrong
electoral system. By adding two rode- until they are determined to be risk-free qa stionbiing q res on d sate wrong aaudi-
pendent members, unaffiliated with any by two-thirds of the State legislature:. ing now Is whether this country wants to
organized political party, we would in- This issue, of course, is complicated . have available over the next 25 or 30 years
sure that all elements of the American and emotional and many advocates are more electricity than it now has or whether
electorate will be represented on this using the debate to obscure, rather than It wants to go with what there is. If the
Commission. As the Commission Is Ares- clarify, the issue. answer is more electricity, as we believe it is,
ently constituted, only representatives of I thank the Washington Post for ex- the choice is whether such additional elec.
organized political parties can be mom- pending the debate by thoughtful any- tricity will come from nuclear fission, the
o. importing all all three. more
hers of the Commission. According to lysis which avoids the emotional rhetoric oil oil o or some ofome m combination the
. If the
recent studies this means that the 41 and the scare tactics which were mount- answer is that there is to be no substantial
percent of the American electorate who ing daily in California. Increase in generating capacity-aectsions
Identify themselves first as Independents It is useful to step back, look ahead, must be made on how to allocate what is
and are unaffiliated with any organized and think through. It Is too easy to miss available (rationing or higher prices?) and
party have no representation at all. the forest for the trees and become en- how to change the nation's lifestyle to reduce
There has been a significant trend in gaged in very narrow arguments which substantially the present per person usage of
the last 20 years with the number of serve mostly to reinforce our long held answered d nat hat ans~' are questions n that have to be
ionally sa not on a state by
voters Identifying themselves as Inde- positions which may have little objectiv= state basis.
pendent increasing from 22 percent in ity and perspective. - Too much of the debate on energy Issues
October 1952 to 41 percent in November The Post has made a valuable contri- these days is too narrowly focused. Nuclear -
1973. bution to the debate on the Proposition plants, we are told, are too dangerous to be
We in Connecticut are particularly 15 by giving perspective to the underly- permitted; coal mining is too destructive to
aware of this trend because the registra- ing issues. people and countryside to be expanded: off-
How do we assess risk-present and shore oil presents too serious a threat to the
tfon fl3ures ir. our State show that nearly coastal environments to be allowed; im-
as many voters are registered as Inde- future? - ported oil makes the nation too dependent
pendent or unaffiliated with any party-- How do we satisfy needs-now and In on the whims of others. None of these mat-
36.3 percent-was are registered as Dem- the future? ters can be- considered adequately in such
ocrats-36.8 percent-and more than are What lifestyle do we want-for our- splendid isolation. The risks of nuclear power
registered as Republicans--26.9 percent, selves and the next generations? plants, for instance, need to be judged
In the four counties of eastern Con- Do we wait and see, stop and stand against the risks of the alternative power
necticut which comprise my dL,trict, two still? sources and, in the case of coal, these Involve
everything from black lung disease to air
are even higher than the statewide figure Do we narrow our choices-and alterna- pollution. - ? . .
with New Lordon independent registra- tives or do we expand and pursue them? The easy answers, of course, are the claims
tion at 43.4 percent and Tolland County We can Improve the sa*w that a tar on power will
Approved For Release 20040/12 : CIA8 10266080003 t -
 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP78MO266OR000300010012-2
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
GOVERNMENT INFORMATION AND INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS SUBCOMMITTEE
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515
Honorable George Bush
Director
Central Intelligence Agency
Washington, D. C. 20205
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP78MO266OR000300010012-2
 EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT
Approved For Release 200 fi/0 g1m1 j S f jA-RDP78M0266.QR9b0360010012-2
ACTION
INFO
DATE
INITIAL
1
DCI
X
2
DDCI
3
S/MC
4
DDS&T
5
DDI
6
DDA
X
7
DDO
8
D/DCI/IC
X
9
D/DCI/NI
1
GC
X
1
LC
X
12
IG
X
13
Compt
14
D/Pers
--
15
p / S --
-----
16
DTR
7
_Asst/ DCI
18
AO/DCI
19
C DCI
X
20
/RS
X
21
22
-
Please develop DCI response.
25X1
5 April 1976
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP78MO266OR000300010012-2
Aprii 19,76