HSCA REVIEW(Sanitized)

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP81M00980R001900050012-4
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 6, 2004
• Sequence Number: 12
• Publication Date: May 16, 1978
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Release 2004/08/19: CIA-R
56..ZV8- /o/,A,
t"?1SPECTOR GENERAL
Tt!1oI2/b
16 May 1978
MEMORANDUM FOR: Acting Chief, Coordination and Review Staff
Office of Legislative Counsel
FROM : Scott D. Breckinridge
Deputy Inspector General
SUBJECT . HSCA Review of IReport
1. I would like to start by observing that Mr. Blakey has made
what I consider to be an incorrect characterization of the OReport,
in stating that it "concerns itself only with individual CIA employees
or with internal CIA actions." This is stated by Mr. Blakey to be his
understanding of the basis for an Agency position that the E--]Report
is therefore not relevant to the HSCA interests. My reservations about
the above charac that it does cite information that relates
which is a matter of necessary interest
to e HSCA. While the is "an evaluative'study of the individual
attitudes- and actions of s-eni'or Agency officials..." and "was prepared
long after an official Agency position had been decided and soley for
internal purposes..." it necessarily contains other information. This
must be apparent to Mr. Blakey and if the final decision is to deny the
report the rationale for doing so might be stated somewhat differently.
2. I had not understood that the HSCA had already been shown earlier
DDO/CT and nnainc +..,,, ...
-1 namy
dilute arguments of revealing the basic thrust ofvthe none this tends to
HSCA, if considerations of sensitivity and sources-and-methods areotohe
control.
3. OIG, for its reports, has tried to establish. a principle that
excepts them from external distribution. This is, done with the rationale
that protection of the reports preserves-the unique function of confidentiality
that assures the quality of IG investigations and reports. However, there
have been some exceptions to this in special situations: the MKULTRA
annex to the 1963 TSD report was released in toto: sections treating the
mail program were released from a CI Staff survey; and an EYES ONLY memo-
randum on MHCHAOS in connection with the 1972 survey of EUR Division was
released. These were released in classified form to the Rockefeller
Commission and Church Committee investigators.
Report a rationale similar to that developed for a reports must experience
Approved For Release 2004/08/19 : CIA- DP81 M00980R001900050012-4
 Approved For Release 2004/08/19 : CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900050012-4
some difficulty when it is realized that earlier detailed studies on the
same subject have already been revealed.
4. Because our position is already partially compromised, partly by
earlier disclosures and partly by some flaws in our rationale, I would
prefer establishing a more flexible position. Still use all the arguments,
but offer access to the report here to only one member of the staff,
subsequent to its sanitization to remove the references to the individual
employees who were involved. Since my comments come somewhat after the
fact they may prove irrelevant, and may reflect the deficiencies in my
current understanding of where things stand.
S. D. Breckinridge
Copies to:
Approved For Release 2004/08/1 : CIA-RDP81 M00980R001900050012-4