PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE AGENCY HEADQUARTERS BUILDING JANUARY 1946 - JULY 1963 VOLUME I TEXT

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 214
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 4, 2006
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: June 1, 1973
• Content Type: PAPER

Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Secret
CIA Internal Use Only
Access Controlled by
CIA Historical Staff
PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE AGENCY HEADQUARTERS BUILDING
JANUARY 1946 - JULY 1963
A
VOLUME I TEXT
F DD/A
R
t 0 ?MAW
Secret
DCI-6
June 1973
Copy 2 of 4
PERMANENT HISTORICAL DOC
DO NOT DESTROY
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
WARNING
This document conta:ins information affecting the national
defense of the United States, within the meaning of Title
18, sections 793 and 794, of the US Code, as amended.
Its transmission or revelation of its contents to or re-
ceipt by an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.
[V IMPDET
Classified by
1----WARN ING NOTICE
SENSITIVE INTELLIGENCE SOURCES
AND METHODS INVOLVED
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUR.E1'
CIA Internal Ilse Only
Accese.Controlled by CIA Historical. Staff
pCI ?6
PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE
AGENCY HEADQUARTERS BUILDING
JANUARY 1946 - JULY 1963
VOLUME I TEXT
25X1
June 1973
HISTORICAL STAFF
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
SECRET ?
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
1
A Personal Note from Colonel Lawrence K. White
I've read the Building History and found it
most interesting and well done. For personal reasons
I've suggested one minor change. There is plenty
left to illustrate, or even dramatize, the internal
struggles. I have no objection to these being used
and I assume Others involved wouldn't either. After
all, intelligent and strong minded men do have dif-
ferences of opinion. In fact, as I read the history
and relived some of those experiences it seemed to.
me that its greatest value might be to illustrate
to anyone contemplating such a project just how
complicated it is to handle all of the myriad of
detail over and above what you expect Architects,
Engineers, and Contractors to do for you. The
pressures from within the Agency, within the Exec-
utive Branch, from the Congress -- individuals as
well as the body itself -- the various planning
Councils and Commissions, State and local bodies,
Civic Organizations, business, and just plain Citizens
etc. etc. are tremendous. I would like to think that
dealing with all of them fully, fairly, and frankly --
and of course forcefully -- accounts for our completing
this building.
I think your history tells the story. Thanks
for allowing me to read it and my congratulations to
LAW'
7 June 1973
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
Foreword
The effort to provide CIA with a Headquarters
Building -- acquisition, planning, construction, and
occupancy -- stretches over a period of about fifteen
years (1947-62), during which Agency components in the
Washington area were stuffed, crammed, or otherwise
deployed in a variety of structures, few of which
became "home." Initial responsibility for preparing
this segment of the Agency's history fell to the Real
Estate and Construction Division (RECD) of the Office
of Logistics, principally because it was the component
most closely concerned with the problem before the
formation of the Building Planning Staff (BPS) -- to
which, as noted in the history, RECD contributed
several key personnel.
Upon completion of the occupancy of the Langley
Headquarters in 1962, many of the BPS personnel re-
turned to RECD; and as this history was begun (October
1970, they were available to provide guidance, and
memories to the original author,
himself formerly a member of the BPS. Because
was scheduled for a PCS almost simultaneously
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUAL".1..
with his designation as an historian, he was able to
complete only a first draft of the report; and, because
of the little time available to him, many basic sources
were not fully exploited.
Major additions to this first draft were recom-
mended by the Curator of the Historical Intelligence
Collection (HIC, Walter Pforzheimer, who at the time
of the activities described was CIA's Legislative
Counsel and therefore deeply involved in the negotia-
tions for the new site. Consequently he has been
quoted extensively throughout this history. In ad-
dition to his own in-depth review of the draft,
Pforzheimer also opened the files of the HIC to
a senior support officer awaiting
reassignment, who undertook the extensive research
necessary to fill many of the gaps left by the first
draft.
The Curator of HIC also provided guidance to
other source materials that proved most useful.
of course, took advantage of the HIC
materials,and, in addition, put his on broad know-
ledge of the Support Directorate to use to recover
other pertinent data.
- iv -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
Among the numerous figures which appear in this
history, special mention should be made of the excellent
photos used from the collection of James Q. Reber.
Photos 22-25, 27, 29-32, and 37-38 some of which were
displayed at Headquarters in honor of the Agency's
25th anniversary -- are from Reber's files.
In conjunction with the sources noted above, the
files and Diary Notes of Colonel Lawrence K. White,
Executive Director-Comptroller (1965-72) -- and Deputy
Director for Support during the Headquarters Building
construction period -- proved invaluable. These
Diary Notes were kept almost daily from 1 January
1952 when he became Assistant Deputy Director for
Administration (ADDA), until his retirement in 1972.
The Diary Notes covering 1952 through 1964, which
were examined in detail for purposes of this history
by the Support Services Historical Officer (SSHO),
make clear the major role played by Colonel White.
He was instrumental in seeking policy approval during
both the planning and the construction phases of the
story, and he was directly involved iii meetings with
the President, Congressmen, state and local officials,
-.v -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
ail
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
business and industrial leaders, private citizens, and
civic organizations in attempting to resolve the
multitudinous problems of the time.
Because the Diary Notes give much of the flavor
of the day-to-day personal involvement of the Agency's
principal manager for activities related to the planning
and construction of the Headquarters Building, they
have been cited verbatim, paraphrased, and otherwise
heavily relied on in this history.
- vi -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R00030006onni_n
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Contents
Page
Foreword iii
Chapter I. The Development of Building
Planning 1
Introduction 1
Background Period, 1948-1951 5
The Decision to Begin, 1951-1953 11
Summary and Conclusions, 1946-1953 37
Chapter II. The Concept Formalized 39
The Expansion of the Planning Group,
1953-1955 41
Critical Coordination Period, 195571956 . 50
The Building Planning Staff, 1955-1957 . 95
Selection of the Architect and Construction
Agent, 1955-1956
101
Chapter III. The Design and Construction
Stage . Me 0 00 000 04 GO
126
The Design of the Superstructure,
1956-1958
127
The Building Planning Staff, 1957-1960 . .
140 '
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
6rAjitt;1.
mei
The Construction Period, 1957-1963
The Laying of the Cornerstone,
3 November 1959
23_2.
149
166
The Occupancy of the Building 1960-1962 .
179
Summary and Conclusions
199
t.1
Appendixes
A.
Chronology .
205
B.
Source References
209
C.
Congressional References
230
ird
D.
Staff Study
237
E.
Buildings Occupied by CIA as of
26 January 1953 . . . .
240
F.
Outline Plan for the Development of the
Proposed CIA Headquarters Project . . .
243
G.
Testimony of Admiral Phillips, USN (Ret.) .
245
H.
Letter, Allen Dulles to George H. Mahon,
Chairman, Defense Subcommittee,
House Committee on Appropriations;
letter, Rowland Hughes, Director,
Bureau of the Budget to Allen Dulles;
8tatement of Allen Dulles in connection
with the request for an appropriation
to construct a headquarters installa-
tion for the Central Intelligenpe
Agency ..... ? , 0 ? ? .....
254
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Page
I. CIA Organizational Arrangement for the
Development of "Definitive" Plans
for a Permanent Headquarters Build-
ing, 4 October 1955 270
J. Memo, Lyman B. Kirkpatrick for Deputy
Director, Support, 4 February 1957 . 271
K. Sites and Site Acquisition Data 1957-69 . 275
L. Professional Achievement Awards 277
M. History of the CIA Cornerstone Box ? 0 0 0 280
Tab A. Contents of Cornerstone Box . 283
,Tab B. Method of Construction
of Metal Boxes Used to Contain
These Articles . ?0 . 0 0 0 0 0 285
N. Invitation to Cornerstone-Laying Ceremony. 287
0. Description of the Headquarters Building,
February 1962 288
P. Photographs
0'009000040
. 295
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
MINI
NMI
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE
AGENCY HEADQUARTERS BUILDING
.JANUARY 946 -?JULY 1963 .
Chapter I
The Development of Building Planning
Introduction
A problem of prime importance throughout the
early years of the Agency was the acquisition of suitable
space to house its headquarters organization.* The
facilities inherited from the Office of Strategic
Services (OSS) and those in use during the brief
period of the interim Strategic Services Unit (SSU)
of the War Department and the Central Intelligence
Group (CIG) were at best temporary and were not
adaptable to the growing requirements of CIA.
In March 1947
* For a chronology, see Appendix A.
SECRET
Approved For Release'2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
Administration, collaborated in preparing the first
of many letters from the Director of Central Intelli-
gence (DCI), Lieutenant General Hoyt S. Vandenberg,
to the Commissioner of the Public Buildings Services
(PBS) of the Federal Works Agency (FWA), W. E. Reynolds,
requesting " ... that CIG be assigned a single perma-
nent, fire-proof building having a minimum capacity
of 350,000 net square feet." 1/* This urgent require-
ment for single-occupancy space in the metropolitan
area of Washington was supported by the statement that
CIG presently was assigned ten buildings.**
Two of the buildings ("NI" and "Q") are
of temporary construction ... housing the
most secret phases of the centralized
day-to-day operations of the Group ...
access to these buildings by simple
housebreaking methods are inherent in
their construction ... both buildings
constitute an ever-present fire hazard
... loss of the documents and/or infor-
mation ... would be a severe blow to
national security. 2/
To this plea the commissioner of PBS replied,
"at the moment the only action I can take regarding
the subject matter ... is to thank you for it and to
* For serially numbered source references, see
Appendix B.
** Appendix P, Figures 1 through. 9, show some buildings
occupied by CIG/CIA prior to the move to Headquarters
Building.
? 2 ?
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SE uRET
note your future needs ...
He then explained:
Space ... in the area is expected to
remain tense during the remainder of
the current fiscal year and perhaps
well into the succeeding period. Pre-
vailing country wide conditions in the
construction industry have prevented
our embarking upon a program of con-
struction... which would go a long way
toward relieving the existing shortage. 3/
Until new construction could be completed, apparently
there was no alternative to the continued and increased
occupancy of the temporary buildings that were built
during World War I and World War II; and the CIG
would have to make do.*
Inasmuch as a copy of the DCI's letter also was
sent to the Bureau of the Budget (BOB), F. J. Lawton,
Acting Assistant Director, replied for that organiza-
tion. Lawton reported that there appeared to be no
hope during fiscal year 1948 for the assignment of
a permanent fire-proof building for the exclusive
use of the CIG; and, as to removing the secret activ-
ities of the organization to fire-proof space during
* By mid 1948, CIG occupied a total of 230,450 net
square feet. 4/
SECRET
Anoroved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
the course of fiscal year 1949, no commitment could
be made. The BOB was relatively certain that there
would be little probability of finding 350,000 square
feet of properly secure space but stated that the
request would be kept in mind when a review//of the
War and Navy Department space requirements was under-
taken. It should be noted that the key words were:
the renewal of the federal building program
in the metropolitan area would present an
opportunity for a wholly adequate solution
to the CIG space problem. I wish to
assure you that neither the PBS nor the
BOB will overlook the importance or the
urgency of your needs.5/
In July 1947 another request for a solution to
CIG's serious space problem was directed to Major
General Philip B. Fleming, USA, Administrator of the
Federal Works Agency (FWA), by Roscoe H. Hillenkoetter,
Rear Admiral, USN, after his appointment as DCI suc-
ceeding Vandenberg.* The new DCI Again emphasized
the paramount importance of physical security for the
many scattered locations, noting that the temporary
construction and accessibility, at ground level seriously
Hillenkoetter was sworn in as DCI on 1 May 1947;
4 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
complicated the handling and processing of highly
classified documents. The DCI closed his letter with
"I hope that you can appreciate the urgency of our
problem and give it early and favorable consideration." y
In his reply of 23 July Fleming assured Hillenkoetter
that the CIG's needs would be thoroughly studied by
the PBS for possible future action but added that
with the imminence of the recentralization of a
number of Government agencies, which had recently
been approved by Congress, it was quite evident that
all space would remain at a premium because Congress
had not approved any new construction in the Wash-
ington area to alleviate the existing space needs. 7/
Background Period, 1948-1951
The DCI next approached Fleming on 16 January
1948; he had been advised by the PBS that the FWA was
then considering a long-range plan for the construction
of additional Government-owned buildings for various
new federal activities. The DCI felt that his request
would be strengthened by the fact that CIA had now
been made a permanent Federal Government Agency by
the 80th. Congress.
- 5 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
OE (-41(E.l.
? I would like to discuss ... the complete
housing requirements ... (and] possible
future site locations ... in order that
steps may be taken now to prepare the
necessary ... drawings and specifications
in accordance with our requirements. I
would appreciate hearing from you ... [or]
your representatives as to the feasibility
of proceeding with such a plan. 8/
Again the reply was not encouraging. On 2 February
1948 Fleming said that "As far as I have been able to
weigh Congressional opinion, construction funds will
not be made available for any buildings except those
in an emergency category." It appeared that Congress
might give authority for a very limited program of
construction that would involve only funds for the
purchase of sites and the design of federal buildings
at that time. FWA's first priority was the new General
Accounting Office (GAO) building which had been ini-
tially authorized before World War II -- the GAO
space situation was considered by PBS to be critical --
but new Congressional authorization was required.
Another project of high priority was the extension
of the State Department Building on Government-owned
land, for which the design development drawings were
partially complete. .Fleming questioned whether any-
thing could be gained at that time by initiating a
-6
? SECRET
Aooroved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
MIN
mai
gni
reni
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
new project before the BOB for a separate building
for CIA; the discussion of a possible future site
and the housing requirements for the Agency could be
started, however, with the Public Buildings Admini-
stration (PBA).
A meeting
of Commissioner
9/
was set for 2 March 1948 in the office
Reynolds of the PBS. The Agency was
represented by the DDCI, Brigadier General Edwin K.
Wright; the Executive for Administration and Manage-
ment, Lyle T. Shannon; and the Chief of the Services
Branch,
that CIA
. 10/ Reynolds suggested
survey four sites owned by the US Government
in the Suitland area of Maryland. A brief tour of the
area on 18 March 1948, as directed by the DDC, was
completed by Shannon, Andrew E. Van Esso, the Acting
25:0 Services Officer, and
Although the sites
appeared to be generally adequate for new construction
to provide for 5,000 persons, warehousing, and all
special equipment, they were not satisfactory from
the point of view of the residence of 70 percent of
the civilian employees of the Agency. Shannon was
concerned about the possible loss of a considerable
- 7 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
number of staff personnel because of transportation
and traffic problems.. 11/ Reynolds further suggested
that CIA re-study its overall.projected space require-
ments and present them to the PBS for the preparation
of an estimate of construction costs and for the
proposed legislation appropriating the funds PBS would
need to finance the cost of preliminary plans and
outline specifications.
A review.and survey of requirements in April
1948 showed that the Agency occupied 407,000 net
square feet of space at 19 locations and that the
estimated requirement was for a single building of
500,000 net square feet -- exclusive of the areas
required for food service -- and an auditorium to
accommodate 1,000 persons. The projected requirement
.was based on reasonable expansion of activities in
accordance with the CIA budget as approved by the
BOB. This information was forwarded to FWA on 29
April 1948 with the understanding that site recom-
mendations would be the subject of a separate letter
ata later date. The letter also stated:
I wish to acknowledge with appreCia-
tion the invaluable assistance given by
- 8 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
25X1
in assembling the above
information .... 12/*
Less than a year after the April 1948 survey
a period of internal reorganization, transition, and
rapid expansion -- the Acting Executive Director,
Shannon, had directed Van Esso to make another space
survey. 14/
Jr., Chief of the Building Maintenance and Utilities
Branch, assisted Van Esso in the space review. 15/
Shannon later informed the DCI in a memorandum dated
16 March 1949 that the Agency occupied 511,640 net
square feet in 21 buildings. He added,
PBS has performed near miracles at
various times, sometimes at the expense
of similar emergency needs of other
Government agencies.
This reference was to the acquisition by the Agency of
temporary "X" building in the West Potomac Park area. 16/
A further space report, dated 30 September 1949 was
was an architect with the
Real Property Acquisition and Utiliza,tion Division of
the PBS during the 1946-48 period. He collaborated
with on the first draft of the referenced
letter. 13/
- 9 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
prepared by
25X1
Space Analyst
of the Contract Section of the Services Branch, for
Van Esso. This report indicated that 3,260 persons
were on duty and 560,229 net square feet of space were
occupied. 17/
The political climate and the economic conditions
of the country during 1949-50 were not considered to
be favorable for a DCI approach to the BOB regarding
the building planning and funding authorization re-
quired from the Congress. The US national security
and international expenditures for fiscal year 1950
were reduced by $1.3 billion, and military manpower
had been reduced from 1.5 million to 1.4 million for
fiscal year 1949. 18/
In the early part of 1950 the Agency explored
the possibility of adding two wings to temporary
buildings "M" and "Q" in order to relieve the critical
space problems confronting the personnel of the col-
lection and dissemination office. In a letter of
31 March. 1950 Oscar L. Chapman, Secretary of the
Interior, replied;to Jess Larson, Administrator of
the General Services Administration (GSA), conveying
the thought that the use of federal park lands "
- 10 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
might be considered a dereliction of duty ... regrets
to Admiral Hillenkoetter."
relayed in an 18 April 1950
DCI from GSA. 19/ 25:0
On 1 August 1950
This information was
covering letter to the
CIA Executive Director, called for
each Agency Assistant Director and
then Acting
a report from
Staff Chief indi-
cating "the ultimate anticipated space requirement
for the activities under your jurisdiction." This
report assumed office occupancy on the basis of 100
square feet per person and special-use space in
accordance with each activity. 20/ A working chart
developed from these estimated component needs called
for 507,770 square feet of office space and 444,245
square feet of special-use space, a total of 952,015
net square feet. 21/ recognized that such
estimates would not be accurate but would provide a
planning base for the DCI's efforts to obtain one or
several permanent buildings to centralize CIA activ-
ities. 22/
The Decision to Begin, 1951-1953
When General Walter Bedell Smith took the oath
as DCI on 7 October 1950, a new era began for CIA.
SECRET "
Annroved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
Smith and his deputy, William H. Jackson, took steps
at once to strengthen the organization of the Agency.
In December they authorized two new Deputy Directors --
one for Administration and one for Operations -- to
improve control over the numerous Assistant Directors,
who had previously reported directly to the DCI. Murray
McConnel was named the first Deputy Director for Ad-
ministration (DDA), eliminating the position of CIA
Executive. Allen W. Dulles was brought aboard in
November as Special.Consultant, slated to head the
Directorate for Operations. Objections were raised
to the somewhat ingenuous title of Director of Opera-
tions, so on 2 January 1951 Dulles was appointed Deputy
Director. for Plans (DDP). 23/
The new management team the DCI, his deputy,
Jackson, Walter R. Wolf, who succeeded McConnel as
DDA on 1 April 1951; and the Legislative Counsel,
then Walter L. Pforzheimer* -- acted vigorously .
from the ?spring to the fall of 1951 to try to obtain
Congressional authorization and funding for a CIA
* Walter Pforzheimer currently (1973) serves as
Curator of the Historical Intelligence Collection.
- 12 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
NNW
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEURET
headquarters building. 24/ The authorization was sub-
that it would be impossible to conceal the construction
of a new CIA building for very long, but it was deter-
mined to keep the project secret for as long as possible.
There were three major reasons for this: to avoid
public reaction to a CIA move from the center of
Washington, which the public might feel was based on
special knowledge that an attack was expected in the
near future; to avoid a rise in land prices in the
area of a. new building for as long as possible; and
to allow the Agency to complete plans and perhaps
some construction with maximum security regarding the
location of communications rooms, special vaults,
and other special features. 25/ Therefore the
25:0
- 13 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
authorizing legislation contained nO overt reference
to a CIA building and no CIA witnesses testified
before the House and Senate Armed Services Committees.
The two chairmen, Congressman Vinson and Senator
red Russell, were briefed privately by General Smith,
Wolf, and Pforzheimer; and the chairmen took the
legislation through their committees. The reports of
the Senate and House Armed Services Committee merely
note that all projects contained in Section 401 are
classified. According to Pforzheimer the final
decision to go forward with the request for an ap-
propriation was made so late in the budget year that
the Agency worked hastily to prepare for Congressional
hearings. Wolf, the DDA, arranged for an outside
architectural firm, Skidmore, Owings, and Merrill, to
provide an artist's rendering of the building for use
in the hearings. At least one criticism was made of
Nod the artist's concepts; Pforzheimer has noted that
wri
It was Allen Dulles who stated that he
could not work in an office without a
..g window. At that point, General Smith
drew a small window into the otherwise
windowless building in the sketch before
him and said to Mr. Dulles, "That's your
office." It is not only my memory but
also Mr. Houston's that this is the
correct version. In subsequent testimony,
Mr. Dulles also referred to it. 26/
- 14 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRE'l
The proposal called for construction of a
building with a large base, underground parking,
four multi-story towers, and no windows; it was to
be located on the Government-owned "Nevius Tract" --
approximately 25 acres in the vicinity of the Iwo
Jima statue in Arlington County, Virginia, and the
adjacent hill near the Arlington National Cemetery.
As late as 29 August 1951 the DCI and Pforzheimer
conferred separately with the Chairman of the Senate
Committee, Senator Russell (D-Ga.), and with Senator
Byrd (D-Va.) regarding the legislation authorizing
CIA to construct a building. Senator Russell stated
that
he would handle the matter personally
with his committee and make the necessary
explanations; and he preferred that no
CIA witness appear. 27/*
Senator Byrd expressed concern regarding the continued
federalization of Virginia counties adjacent to the
Dictrict of Columbia because of the resultant tax
losses but agreed not to oppose the CIA request.
* This was the same position previously adopted by
Chairman Vinson of the House Armed Services Committee.
- 15 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
dal
lot
awl
mai
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUKE1
As soon as the House passed the authorizing
legislation in August 1951 and in accordance with
standard procedure for CIA matters, the Chief Clerk
of the House Appropriations Committee was informed
of the $38-million authorization for a CIA building
and the Agency's desire that the committee appropriate
the
ing hearings on funding the section of
in which the CIA authori-
zation was included, Pforzheimer was invited by
funds. On 2 October, as the committee was approach-
Subcommittee before which
the hearings were being held, to discuss the project
with him informally. The chairman was
by Pforzheimer, who
25X1 reasons Chairman
fully briefed
explained that for security
had
handled the authorizing legislation themselves with-
out any formal CIA testimony. Chairman
agreed
that this would be the preferable method of handling
the matter, that he would consider the problem, and
that he would advise the Agency if formal testimony
was required. Any funding would be contained in the
Second Supplemental Appropriation Bill for 1952
? 16 ?
.11 ???
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
mit
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEGREI:
then before the full committee -- which included the
construction funds.
To the Agency's surprise and consternation the
House Appropriations Committee eliminated funds for
the CIA building in reporting out the bill on 8 -
October 1951. The next day Chairman
advised
Pforzheimer that the subcommittee felt that the item
had come befOre them too late to be considered in
detail and had therefore rejected it. He suggested,
however, that the Agency have the item restored by
the Senate Appropriations Committee, and if that
committee approved funds for the building the matter
could be thrashed out in
conference between the two
followed, Chair-
said he would be inclined to accept the
committees. If this procedure were
man
Senate amendment but would not commit himself prior
to a joint House-Senate committee meeting. On the
same date, in a letter to Pforzheimer confirmed
the denial of funds by his subcommittee. 28/
Considerable scurrying around ensued, both at
headquarters and on Capitol Hill, leaaing to the
DCI's appearance before the Senate Appropriations .
Committee to seek restoration of the funds that the
- 17 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
House had disallowed. As a result of the DCI's
testimony, the committee restored the funds as re-
quested, and after Senate passage the bill went to
conference to iron out disputed items in the House
and Senate versions.*
A member of the Senate Appropriations Committee
or its staff later told an interesting story that
occurred during the "mark up" of the bill. No out-
siders are present during the mark up, at which time
members of the committee determine what items to
approve, change, or disapprove. The Chairman of the
Senate Appropriations Committee at that time was
* With reference to the date of the DCI's appearance
before the Committee, Pforzheimer has noted that "I
have found no written record of the date in our files.
Mr. Francis S. Hewitt, then as now a member of the
professional staff of the Senate Appropriations Com-
mittee, checked the committee records for me in Fe-
ruary 1971. They have no record of the date of
General Smith's appearance in Executive Session.
As was the custom at that time, no trinscript of
.the testimony was made. From internal evidence,
however, Mr. Hewitt and I have 'concluded that the -
date of the DCI's.testimony was almost certainly
12 October.1951." 29/
- 18 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUREI:
STATOTHR
25)0 On 23 October 1951
wrote Smith
that the House's original position had been sustained
in conference and that no funds for a CIA building
were provided by the conferees. He assured the
Agency, however, of consideration at a future date. 30/
Smith replied on 26 October, stating that CIA would
resubmit the project "as soon as possible" 31/; but
this did not occur in 1951.. One participant in the
negotiations with Congress has since reported that
The loss of funds to construct a CIA
building was indeed a blessing in dis-
guise. Our estimates as to space re-
quirements were woefully inadequate, as
were the cost estimates. No firm decision
had been reached as to a site. In fact,
we were ill-prepared to make even those
submissions which. achieved our authori-
zation.32/
At this point.in the planning stage the Agency had.an.
approved Congressional authorization of $38 million
19: -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUI-(E'l?
but no planning or construction appropriation of any
kind -- not even funds to cover the costs of the design
or the preliminary plans and outline specifications.
Space reports as of 25 September 1951 indicated that
rad
the Agency occupied 947,575 net square feet, with
6,987 persons in 31 buildings at more than a score
? of scattered locations in the metropolitan area. 33/
Long before the act became a law, the Agency
? was well aware that the authorization of $38 million
was insufficient. In a memorandum for the record
dated 9 April 1951, Shannon described a conference
with Martin, the Emergency Planner for BOB; Reynolds
mei of PBA; Wilfred L. Peel, Chief of CIA Administration
Services (AS); and Edward R. Saunders, the CIA Comp-
troller, in which Martin stated that the Estimates
Division of BOB wanted to incorporate in the military
budget for fiscal year 1952 funds for the construction
of a complete new CIA installation. This estimate
was required not later than 13 April 1951. The fol-
lowing is from Shannon's memorandum:
Based on space for complete
physical security, special space for train-
ing, food, medical facilities, vaults, air
conditioning, warehouses, garage, etc. Mr.
Reynolds stated that an estimate of approx-
imately $46 million should be submitted.
- 20 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bElAt..61
This is broken down broadly as indicated
below:
Office buildings $40,000,000
Development of site,
including utilities 1,500,000
Warehouse and garage 2,250,000
Access roads 1,500.,000
Contingencies 750,000
Mr. Reynolds stated that the access roads
figure was flexible and would depend en-
tirely on site location. He further stated
that the figure for site development was
based on utilizing land now owned by the
Government. He suggested the most suitable
sites now owned ...'were two tracts of
approximately 400 acres each one located
between Langley, Virginia, and the Potomac
River (now owned by the Public Roads Admin-
istration) and one at Suitland, Maryland,
(now owned by the Public Buildings Service).
We have been requested to survey these
sites and to indicate whether or not they
are considered suitable by the Director.
Mr. Reynolds strongly advised against under-
ground construction. He stated that all re-
cent tests and information had indicated that
underground construction of the nature pro-
posed was more dangerous in atomic attack than
above-surface areas. His proposal is an "H"
shaped building completely above-ground, the
first two wing stories to be windowless and
blast-proof, and the wings connected by space
for food facilities to be also of blast-proof
and fire-proof construction. They have basic
plans and specifications for such a type
building which could be suitably' modified to
meet our physical security needs and the
interior laid out in a manner coTpletely
adaptable to our requirements.
Both Mr. Martin and Mr. Reynolds pointed
out that this project should be presented
as a special project and in such a manner
that it would not become confused with the
so-called "Dispersal Plan." 34/
- 21 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
Active Agency internal planning finally began
after a meeting with Commissioner Reynolds on 10 August
1951 when Peel directed
Chief of 25:0
the Real Estate and Construction Division, to respond
to a study entitled "Adaption of Federal Office Building
to Housing Requirements of CIA." iv Peel had pre-
viously re4eved from the Chief of the CIA Security
Office, Colonel Sheffield Edwards, information dated
30 July 1951 concerning security measures for consider-
ation with any preliminary planning for a proposed
new headquarters building.*
These studies, as well as others prepared during
the fall and winter of 1951-52, were made primarily
to determine the style and type of facility most
suitable for CIA and whether or not a typical govern-
ment building could be converted or constructed to
meet the needs of the Agency. 37/ As indicated below,
pointed out how the preliminary design
proposals submitted by the PBA for CIA consideration
were unacceptable, even though he was convinced that
* By the end of January 1952, it had been decided,
that a Security Office representative would "participate
actively from now on in the planning of the new build-
ing." 3.?./
- 22 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
?
PBA/GSA would be a better design and construction
agent.than any Department of Defense design and con-
struction supervisory service that might be available
to the Agency.
The proposed design is another massive
type of structure with technical dis-
advantages as the block-type originally
proposed, but to a greater degree, since
the new scheme envisions the elimination
of all windows. ... the H-shaped building
design would lend itself somewhat more
readily to compartmentalization ... as
the tallest and most imposing structure
within a radius of several miles, the
building would be an excellent target
for aerial attack. ... [Its] location
and architectural treatment will inevi-
tably make it a focal point for much
attention and curiosity and the possi-
bilities for future expansion are not
good. ... the scheme is not based upon
functional requirements, but representing
a grouping of elements designed to result
in an esthetically pleasing ensemble.
... costs basis [sic] would be consider-
ably greater than the budgeted amount ...
since in lieu of partial mechanical
ventilation ... complete air conditioning
would be required. ... as a monumental
structure it will require more costly
exterior finish than the untreated poured
concrete envisioned for the earlier scheme.
... numerous special features required
by our components were not taken into
account in the original cost estimates.
? ... estimates of space requiremepts are
now approximately 25 percent in excess
?of the amount provided in the original
authorization proposal.
- .23 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
25X1
mai
IMO
NIP
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUKEI
strongly advised that these points be sub-
mitted for consideration by the persons responsible
for the ultimate decision on the suitability of these
PBA design schemes. 38/ The Acting Chief of RECD,
stated in a memorandum to the
Chief of Administrative Services that "the general
and technical details... [of] plans and specifications
for the new CIA building" were high on the list of
projects of the division. 39/
In the fall of 1951 Colonel Lawrence K. White,
then Deputy Assistant Director for Operations, was
asked to become the Assistant Deputy Director for
Administration (ADDA). After considerable soul
searching -- and no little pressure from higher
echelons, including the DCI -- Col. White accepted
the new position, effective on 2 January 1952. 40/
As he recorded at the time, "The DD/A also made me
responsible for the new building plans and asked me
to accept this as a number one priority among other
things." 41/
was Chief, Acquisitions Branch, RECD, and
25:0 the irs agency Realty Officer. He resigned from the
Agency on 2 October 1956 and as of September 1970 was,
serving as Circuit Court Judge for the 8th District,
Commonwealth of' Virginia.
- 24 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
ail
ittsi
mod
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
As chief of planning for the new building,
White began a task that was to occupy a significant
portion of his time over the next decade. The job
required a "ramrod"; and as will be apparent in sub-
sequent chapters of this history, White more than met
the challenges of the assignment. Almost immediately
he established an ad hoc committee for the new build-
25)0 ing.
, Chief of Administration Services,
was designated as secretary to maintain and distribute
the minutes. 42/
On 7 January 1952, just a few days after his
appointment as ADDA, White accompanied the DDA, Wolf,
on a visit to Commissioner Reynolds of PBS to review
the building planning problem. They emphasized that
inasmuch as Congress had declined to appropriate the
funds at its last session,
... there was no existing structure ...
into which our departmental organization
could fit under one roof ... and none
available at any time in the foreseeable
future.
Reynolds stated that Wolf's understanding of the
problem was entirely correct and that he did not Con-
sider a written statement to be necessary and, further,
that he would be happy to testify personally before
25 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
any committee with which the Agency had difficulty.
The DDA related the Agency's understanding that the
only three possible sites available were the Langley
and Nevius sites in Fairfax County and Arlington,
Virginia, respectively and Suitland,Maryland.* Wolf
added that he did not believe that the DCI would be
willing to locate at either Suitland or Langley. He
said that
the plans prepared by PBS for the
Nevius Tract are attractive and accept-
able ... however, it would ... require
the entire $38 million ... to construct
a building on this site which would meet
the approval of the National Capital
Park and Planning Commission (NCPPC).
The DDA thought that the Congress might not appropriate
$38 billion and that CIA might be forced to contract
something for say, $25 million; thus he concluded
that "we, therefore, cannot construct a building on
the Nevius Tract."
The Commissioner replied that a fourth site
could be made available on the US Soldiers' Home
* The locations of the sites which were at one time
or another considered for the Headquarters Building
are shown on map 1, inside back cover of Volume II;
- 26 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X9
Wig
too
una4
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
property, and the construction would not require the
architectural and esthetic fringes that would be
necessary for the Nevius location. Reynolds then
compared the Agency space problem with that of the
new General Accounting Office Building, which was
to house 8,000 employees and cost $25 million. He
stated that if CIA would reduce the number of employ-
ees who were required to be under one roof to, say,
"we could come very close
to constructing an adequate building," even though
construction costs had risen approximately 17 per-
cent since the GAO contract was let:
Reynolds summarized his position by saying that
he much preferred to see the Agency build on the Nevius
site. Wolf agreed but subsequently requested that
White, Peel, and
visit the Soldiers' Home
property the following day, 8 January 1952. Reynolds
also is reported to have stated that
he thought we ought to know ... it was
the President's desire that the Govern-
ment "Dispersal Plan" was to be revived
... and NSRB has lowered its minimum
distance requirements from the previous
twenty-mile radius to a ten to twelve-
mile radius.
- 27 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bt,U.Kkj:
When asked by the ADDA whether in his opinion this
should influence CIA in any way in proceeding with
the new building plans, Reynolds was positive in his
belief that it should not. 43/
The ADDA thought that the Soldiers' Home site
,was "adequate, that the location was in rolling country .
with fairly large trees covering practically the
entire area." This site was 2.4 miles from the
Capitol -- 10 minutes traveling time compared with
2.6 miles from the existing CIA Administration Build-
ing to the Capitol -- also 10 minutes traveling time. li/
At its first meeting on 10 January 1952 the
ad hoc committee also was advised that four possible
sites were available: Langley, the US Soldiers' Home,
the Nevius tract, and the tract in Suitland. The
DCI had already declared the Suitland tract to be
unsatisfactory, so the committee decided to concen-
trate on Langley --.although the DCI had indicated
that it might be too distant from the center of things
-- and the Soldiers' Home. The committee did not
think the $38 million authorized would be sufficient
for the monumental type of building required on the
Nevius tract. Pforzheimer, a Member of the committee,
- 28 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECREt
pointed out that the steps that the committee was
taking had been urged by him in mid-November and that
now two valuable months had been lost; speed was of
the essence if the Agency was to secure appropriations
in the 1952 session of Congress. 45/
? At the second meeting of the ad hoc committee,
on 16 January 1952, White reported the DCI's decision
that the Langley and Suitland sites were not to be
considered; that the Nevius tract was his objective;
and that the only alternative was the Soldiers' Home
site. On 30 January 1952, PBS was advised of the
Agency's desire to proceed with the Nevius site and
was told that the DCI would not consider Langley
under any conditions. 46/ At this time the Agency
agreed to make not more than $5,000 available to PBS
for preliminary sketches of "modified type block
building' for the Nevius tract. The plans were to
include cost estimates for the structure and were to
be completed by the end of February 1952.* 47/
* With reference to the PBS sketches, white noted:
reports that PBS has gone over the $5,000 we
guaranteed as reimbursement for plans and estimates
for our new building. I told him we would make good
? a reasonable amount in excess of $5,000, but wanted
to make sure that they understood that they did not
(footnote continued on following page)
- 29 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECat.b 1
Allen W. Dulles, the DDP, had been named to
succeed William H. Jackson as DDCI on 23 August 1951,
at which date Jackson became the DCI's Special Assist-
ant and Senior Consultant. 51/ In the meantime the
Chief of RECD was directed to make a realistic updated
cost estimate for construction of a building similar
to Federal Office Building No. 2 (the US Navy Annex),
at 20th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W. He
reported that
... The Navy Annex was built in 1941 ...
on 25 acres of Park land ... at four
dollars per gross square foot ... has
seven wings and headhouse. It could be
built in 1951 for eight dollars per
gross square foot, or $13.5 million,
feet per person ... partitions, lighting,
floor treatment, elevators and escalators
have a blank check." 48/ This excess amount may also
have included sketches for a building at the Soldiers'
Home tract. 49/ White's admonitory attitude toward
overexpenditures was Characteristic throughout his
Agency career. About this same time, and also in
connection with the new building, a member of the
Building Committee asked for about $1,000 to prepare
briefing aids for Congress. White told the requestor
that "he should talk with the Comptroller and the
General Counsel about the legality of spending funds
in this manner and added that if it could be arranged,
I would approve of the expenditure; however, I cautioned
him not to develop a presentation so elaborate that
a Congressman might ask how much it cost, etc." zi../
- 30 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
would bring the cost to approximately
$15.8 million ... special requirements,
soundproof areas, standby power, labora-
tories, conference areas, numerous vaults,
secure telecommunication, sound and pro-
jection systems, floodlighting, security
fences, etc. ... plus 10 percent con-
sultant fees would bring the total [to]
$24.5 million for 1 million square feet
or 1.670 million gross square feet of
25:0 space.
stated that in most respects this type of
building was reasonably adaptable to the needs of the
Agency and offered a much more acceptable solution
than the three proposals previously submitted by PBS:
"the writer believes that the figure of $25 million
may be regarded as probably sufficient."* 22/
Meanwhile, in'the winter of 1952, another
problem arose. This was in the form of Congressional
hearings before the House Public Works Committee --
ignorant of any possible CIA interest -- as to the
ultimate disposition of the Nevius tract, including
the possibility of surplus sale, return to private
ownership, or turning it over to the National Capital
Parks and Planning Commission. 53/ Subsequently,
through CIA intercession, the bill was stricken from
* Palmer, Chief Estimator of the Design and Construc-
tion Division of PBS, assisted in the research
for this cost-estimate study.
- 31 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
,m1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
the House consent calendar, thus killing it for the
remainder of the session and leaving the Agency free
to consider plans for using the tract.
Towards the end of May 1952 the Legislative
Counsel recommended that unless there was an emergency
no CIA legislation should be submitted to the Congress
in that session. It was obvious that since Congress
was economy minded and this was a Presidential election
year -- and with Congress anxious to adjourn for the
party conventions and campaigns -- nothing but the
most pressing legislation and appropriations would be
considered. Nevertheless the Bureau of the Budget
included a request for funds in the amount of $38
million in the draft of the
Appropriations bill, which they forwarded to the
Congress early in June. On about 5 June 1952 the DCI
discussed with
ma 25:0 , before
which the CIA appropriation came, the advisability
of going forward with the appropriation request at
25:0 that time. informed Smilth that in
his opinion it would be inadvisable to proceed, as it
ami
might subject CIA to undue publicity and criticism.
- 32 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
In view of this opinion Smith. decided not to proceed,
and the $38 million request was withdrawn from the
bill., 54/
Meanwhile every practicable alternative for a
solution to the growing space problems was being in-
vestigated. The PBS acquired the Riverside Stadium
Building at 26th and p Streets, N.W., and assigned
it to CIA after the DCI furnished a certificate of
necessity dated 3 August 1951.
temporary buildings "I" and
net square feet of office space
55/ This building and
"J" added another 245,000
to the Agency's position
as of 30 June 1952. Liaison Officer
25:0
to CIA from the Space Management Division of PBS,
greatly assisted CIA in obtaining
space during the
early part of 1951-52. 56/
was
25X1
named Chief of the Office of
General Services of OGS,
replacing Peel, on 17 March
1952. 57/
25X1
25X1
25X1
25X1
an architect, also transferred from PBS to CIA
who had held several im-
on 12 May 1952.
portant positions in the PBS since December 1941, had
- 33 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
ami
25X1
sn'
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
brA_Aii....B
most recently (1948-1952) been on loan from the Office
of the Supervising Architect of PBS to the Office of
Lorenzo S. Winslbw, Architect of the White House.*
was named Chief of RECD, with a staff of five,
and assumed an active part in the further development
of that division and in resolving the rapidly growing
world-wide space and construction problems facing CIA. 58/
By mid-summer 1952 as the Agency continued its
rapid expansion, the search for new space was intensified.
Consideration was given to a building at 7th and
Streets N.W. in the District, to the Munitions and Navy
buildings on Constitution Avenue, to Temporary Buildings
T and E, and to the Hurley-Wright Building, 59/ On 1
August 1952 the Acting DDA, White, submitted a staff
study to the DCI recommending that the Agency should
make an immediate attempt to acquire the Navy Building,
with the Munitions Building as second choice.**
was one of the principal PBS liaison
officials during the reconstruction and modernization
of the executive mansion under the administration of
President Harry S. Truman. The John MpShane Construc-
tion firm was the contractor-builder for this major
renovation project.
* *
For the text of the staff study, see Appendix D.
- 34 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUKET
The DCI approved the recommendation on the day it was
submitted. 60/ Search for the site for the building
did not close, however, and, at the end of 1952 and the
beginning of 1953, consideration was given to the
possibility of construction on the 2430 E Street
property.* 61/
Almost one year later, however, the General
Services Administration (GSA), after careful study,
again recommended that CIA construct a new building.
In its, report of 24 June 1953, GSA suggested that the
site at Langley, Virginia, was the best available
for that purpose. 63/
In 1953 there was little activity on the Congres-
sional front for a CIA building. In June, White raised
the question of whether or not it was advisable to
discuss the matter with the Chairman of the House
Appropriations Committee in order to insure committee
support with the Bureau of the Budget. 64/ on 9 June,
White, Saunders, and Pforzheimer met with Kenneth
Sprankle, chief clerk of the committee, to see whether
?
..?
* It may have been that the proposed site was on the
North side of E Street, across from the building at
2430 E. 62/
- 35 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
roe
mai
mil
emit
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEGKET
or not Chairman Taber or the full Appropriations Com-
mittee might at least give some expression of endorsement
to bringing the Agency together in one building,
particularly as funds for construction for a new
building had been eliminated from the budget for fiscal
year 1953. Sprankle said that such support should
come from the Executive Branch initially; otherwise
the Agency might be tempted to use the Congressional
endorsement to coerce the Executive Branch.
White assured Sprankle that this was not so,
as the Bureau of the Budget had agreed that CIA should
have a building. Sprankle noted that as yet the Agency
had no firm proposal for a building or for costs, that
any such committee move would be premature, and that
the Agency representatives should raise the question
at a later date when figures were available for the
chairman to assess costs against potential savings. 65/
By September the site selection was still in
doubt, and White informed Pforzheimer that he had
discussed the matter with the DCI and DDCI on 12
September, at which time the DCI favor6d the present
site at 2430 E Street and the DDCI preferred Langley.
GSA held to its position that there was no building
- 36 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
presently available that could house the whole Agency
and that they would support CIA's request in Congress. L6/
No final determination was yet in sight, and none was
made in 1953.
Summary and Conclusions, 1946-1953
During the transition from CIG to CIA, and con-
tinuing through the Korean war, there was a steady
increase in the number of Agency personnel in the
headquarters area. Make-do facilities in various
structures of World War-I and World War-II vintage
were acquired and used for a host of sensitive intel-
ligence purposes, both overt and covert.* From 1946
to 1950 various space surveys and projections of
space requirements were used by Agency spokesmen in
appeals to Congress, the Federal Works Administration,
and the General Services Administration for additional
space and authorizations and appropriations for a new
building to house the Agency.
* See Appendix E for a list of buildings and loca-
tions as of 26 January 1953. On this date the Agency
occupied more than 1.1 million net square feet in
37 widely scattered locations. 67/
- 37 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25x1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEURE 1?
At the end of September 1951 the approved
Act included a $38-million author-
ization for a new CIA building. There was, however,
no Congressional appropriation of funds to implement
the authorizationand.there was serious doubt by
some Agency planners that the appropriation was
adequate to meet estimated construction needs. The
Agency and other Governmental departments -- Interior,'
Navy, and GSA, in particular -- were uncertain about
the suitability, in fact the availability, of potential
construction sites. By June 1953 however, the General
Services Administration recommended the Langley site as
the best available. As will be noted subsequently,
not everyone agreed with the GSA recommendation --
the proponents and opponents would continue to put
their particular cases on view until the 11th hour,
when the Agency was asking the Senate Appropriations
Committee for an appropriation for building at the
Langley site.
- 38 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
awl
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Chapter II
The Concept Formalized
In the early 1950's the Office of Defense
si? Mobilization (ODM) had established dispersion standards
for new construction of Government buildings; but in
November 1954 the new DCI, Allen Dulles,* requested
?
from Flemming, the Director of ODM, an exception to
those dispersion standards to permit the Agency to
build within the radius of high danger, an area
determined by the presumed results of an atomic attack
on Washington's primary targets -- the Pentagon, the
Capitol, and the White House. Construction of the
recently approved Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Bridge
across the Potomac River with its approaches just
west of Memorial Bridge would necessitate the demolition
of a large portion of the buildings then occupied by
CIA. Additional buildings were scheduled for demolition
mir * On 26 February 1953 Dulles succeeded Smith as DCI;
on 23 April Lieutenant General Charles P. Cabell was
sworn in as the new DDCI. 68/
- 39 -
SECRET
Aooroved For Release 2009/01/16 CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
eel
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
when the Interior Department started the major project
of clearing the parkland areas of temporary structures.*
The DCI considered it essential that site and building
plans be formalized without delay for the construction
of a permanent headquarters facility to house the Agency
in the Washington metropolitan area. Accordingly he
stated in his letter to the Director of ODM, "after
careful consideration I have concluded that CIA could
not effectively accomplish its mission from such a
dispersed location." It was essential that the DCI
be immediately available to the President and the
National Security Council (NSC): GSA had suggested,
and the Agency was considering, several federally
owned properties at distances varying from five to
ten miles from the White House. 69/ The Director of
ODM in.the Executive Office of the President told the
DCI on 31 December 1954 that
as a result of the consultations we have
had and also as a result of the discussion
at a recent meeting of the Cabinet we are
willing to concur in the exception to the
* NCPC stated in a press release of 20 August 1954.
that "Temporary Office and Resident Hall Buildings
will be demolished."
- 40 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
current "dispersion standards" ...
In concurring in the exception I hope,
however, you will give consideration to
the possibility of locating a portion of
your agency at an emergency relocation
site. 70/
At this point new and additional emphasis had been
brought to all phases of. the, CIA planning effort.
The Expansion of the Planning Group, 1953-1955
? The RECD had been transferred from the Office
of General Services (OGS) to the Office of Procure-
ment and Supply (OP&S) of the DDA and carried with it
the preliminary planning responsibilities for a new
building. 71/ On 20 March 1953 OP&S became the
Logistics Office (OL) with James A. Garrison as
Chief.* 72/ As of 2 October 1952 the division had a
Table of Organization (T/O) of seven, with ten persons
on duty, counting detailees; seven additional individ-
uals were processing or awaiting security clearances.** 73/
* On 21 July 1954 the name was again changed, this
time to the Office of Logistics, the name in current
(1972) use.
** In early 1953 RECD moved from Room '215 of North
Building at 2430 E Street to the second floor of Alcott
Hall in the West Potomac Park area. The move provided
additional office space for the growing number of staff
and detailed employees required to manage and supervise
the world-wide responsibilities of the division.
- 41 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
U.K.E 1
For the preliminary planning of a new headquarters
building, the Agency requested PBS to assign two liaison
architects to RECD on a reimbursable detail; and
and Harry M. Ambrose** from the office of
the Assistant Commissioner for Design and Construction,
PBS, were so designated. Peyton F. Anderson,*** Public
Building Superintendent, was detailed from the Space,
Maintenance, and Facilities Division (SM&FD) of OGS to
RECD to provide unclassified orientation for the new
architects pending their processing and security
clearances. 74/ During this period
25X1
and Ambrose 25)0
briefed members of RECD on the administrative responsi-
bilities and functions of PBS with regard to providing
services to Government agencies requiring construction
subsequently became the principal staff
architect and an employee of the CIA Building Plan-
ning Staff of OL, on which he served until 1959.
** Ambrose continued as GSA liaison architect to
the Building Planning Staff until his retirement in
1960 because of poor health. Ambrose died in 1960.
*** Anderson previously served as Chief of the
Telephone Branch of SM&FD, OSG, during.the 1949-51
period.
- 42 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
of federal buildings in the Washington metropolitan
area. Many GSA publications were presented and
explained,* using directives and publications on site
.or
MIN
gni
,a?
selection, physical characteristics, type of construc-
tion, material used, and liaison with state and local
utilities-and jurisdictions. The briefers- defined
in general terms the information that was to be de-
veloped by the Agency and furnished to GSA if GSA
were selected to be the design and construction
management agent. 75/ Charles R. Smith, an ensign
on detail to RECD from the Navy Department as a
civil engineer, joined the.planning group in late
1953. Lieutenant Colonel Edward T. Riley, on detail
to RECD from the Air Force as a civil engineer, was
assigned to the planning group in early 1954. Riley
was named project officer under the Chief of RECD.
This five-man group began the analysis of the
-my previously collected data on space and special re-
quirements. The data were compared with similar
* The principal GSA publications used 'were: Guide
for Space Planning and Layout, Instructions to Con-
tract Architects, Architectural Drawing Requirements,
and Structural, Mechanical and Electrical Engineering
Data.
- 43 -
SECRET
Aooroved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
planning information collected by.the State Department
and by NSA in the course of preparing a "space direc-
tive" for the construction of its new headquarters
facilities.* Ambrose provided the Agency with a copy
of the Department of State space directive dated Sep-
tember 1954;?and this was invaluable to the RECD planning
group in its early stages. This 33-page detailed
document listed a total of 1,563,011 square feet of
space to be constructed
employees at 21st
Street and Virginia 'Avenue, N.W. Meanwhile the
Acquisitions Branch of RECD was engaged in extensive
preliminary site surveys.**
More than 40 commercial and federal site loca-
tions within a 20-minute vehicle radius of the White
House were surveyed.*** Sites in the metropolitan area,
* CIA's Finance Sub-Committee, headed by Lawrence
R. Houston, General Counsel, was studying the advantages
and disadvantages of "lease-purchase legislation" after
receiving from the PBS a copy of a prospectus covering
the new Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) building to be
built near Germantown, Maryland.
*** On CIA's behalf, GSA was advertising in the area
newspapers for suitable sites of 70 acres.
- 44 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
offered and recommended by the PBS, were later reduced
to six, each having a minimum of 70 acres. In the staff
study. of 28 September 1954 these sites were identified
as Langley, Virginia; Arlington Hall, Virginia; Hybla
Valley, Virginia; Suitland, Maryland; Beltsville, Mary-
land; and Bethesda, Maryland* The Chief of RECD and the
Chief of Logistics (C/OL) jointly recommended to the
DDA that
the DCI negotiate with the Secretary of
Defense or Secretary of Army to acquire
the Arlington Hall property for Agency
use. ... Land areas other than Govern-
ment owned be considered should efforts
to acquire the Arlington Hall property
prove unsuccessful. 77/
Despite the recommendations of RECD favoring the
Arlington Hall location and following a personal inspec-
tion of the site, the DCI
was not completely sold on this site and
requested that we explore further the
possibility of overcoming the three major
obstacles at Langley, i.e., transportation,
sewerage disposal, and civic objection. 78/
Similarly, the DDA and members of the planning group
also inspected the Bureau of Engraving and Printing with
a view toward Agency occupancy in lieu of new construc-
tion, but the building was highly impractical for
anticipated Agency uses. 79/
- 45 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
i.
Early in 1955a serious effort was mounted to
have the Agency locate in a proposed redevelopment
area then being planned for southwest Washington.
There was considerable influence behind the promotional
activity for this area, with the former head of the
Office of Strategic Services, General William Donovan,
as attorney representing the promoter, William Zecken-
dorf. 80/ The DDA, however, proved adept in fending
off the promoters -- as will be noted shortly, it was
becoming clear that Langley was the most feasible
location -- but at the same time he afforded them
no grounds to claim that they were not treated
courteously and fairly as his Diary shows:*
On 17 March General Donovan and Mr.
Reynolds, representing Mr. William Zecken-
dorf, called on me to discuss the location
of a CIA building in the. southwest area.
We spent about an hour discussing the matter.
I told them that we were still interested
in the southwest area but that our principal
concern was how we were going to get our
employees to and from the area which, at
* White, in fact, had already been told by Colonel
T. A. Lane, Engineer Commissioner of the District of
Columbia and a member of the National Capital Planning
Commission (NCPC), "that the Webb and Knapp plan [Webb
& Knapp was the construction firm associated with
Zeckendorf in the southwest development plan] at the
moment [8 February 55] had no official status." 81/
- 46 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECKEI.
the moment, is already congested. Mr.
Reynolds said that he would study the
matter and attempt to offer us further
advice. In addition, I told them that
ist the National Capital Planning Commission
had more or less thrown cold water on
any idea we had of going to the southwest
areas until the basic differences in con-
cept between the Planning Commission and
Mr. Zeckendorf were sorted out. Mr.
Reynolds and General Donovan both thought
that they would be sorted out sometime
soon. I also told them that we might
have our problems with the Office of
Defense Mobilization and that the National
Capital Planning Commission had informally
indicated that they might oppose our loca-
tion immediately north of Fort McNair, but
on, the other hand, might possibly consider
our locating along the Mall, wherever the
Mall is finally located. I assured them
that we would not make a final decision on
a site without consulting them. 82/
On 22 November 1954 the DDA established a steer-
ing committee to provide Agency guidance and general
*go
direction for the planning of the new building. The
committee was to review reports and recommendations
ftid
regarding plans, design, and other matters requiring
policy determination and was to recommend appropriate
action to the DCI. The original members of this com-
mittee were the DDA, chairman; the Chief of RECD, OL,
secretary*; the DDI; the DDP; the AD/Communications;
mid
* The SM&F Division, GSO, had been transferred to
RECD/OL and renamed the SM&F Branch on 8 February
1954. 83/
- 47 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
mei
awl
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEGRE".1"
the DTR; the AD/Personnel; the Inspector General; the
General Counsel; the D/Security; the Comptroller; the
Chief of the Management Staff; and the Chief of Logistics.
The committee held its first meeting on 22 December
1954.* White stated that the DCI was "very interested"
in obtaining the necessary approvals and funds in 1955.
advised the committee that there were six
possible sites, of which Langley and Arlington Hall
were the most desirable. Because the Langley site
was more accessible to most Agency employees, was well
oriented to other Government agencies with which the
Agency maintained extensive liaison and offered more
seclusion for security than any other location, the
DCI favored Langley at this point, as did the steering
committee, which was under the direction of the DDS.**
* John F. Blake, currently (1973) Director of the
Office of Logistics, represented the IG, and Dr.
represented the Office of the
DDP. Subsequently a representative from the Office
of the DCI was added to this group. 84/
** The need for this formal steering committee must
have been minimal. The LC files do not include the
minutes of the second meeting, and the third meeting
took place in October 19551 85/
- 48 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
During the steering committee meeting on 22
December 1954, White also noted that the Southwest
Washington Development Project would probably mature
too farmn the future to be of use to the Agency.
In a meeting with the DDS, the Chief of OL, and the
Chief of RECD, Peter A. Strobel, Commissioner of PBS,
reported that
aid the NCPC is very desirous of having both
the George Washington Memorial Highway
and the Cabin John Bridge (Circumfer-
aml ential Highway) constructed ... . He
further felt that if through our efforts,
funds for highway construction could be
approved, the Commission would undoubtedly
view our use of the Langley property more
favorably.
mil
rioni
It was agreed that the PBS would make efforts to have
the agenda of the next NCPC meeting include CIA's
site location problems. 86/
25:0 By late 1954 the RECD planning officer,
had prepared an outline for the development of
"Definitive Requirements," with priorities numbered
one through six.* L./ The RECD/OL planning group was
not formally recognized until 4 August 1955, when it
became the Special Project Staff (SPS) of RECD with
a T/O of three --
* See Appendix F.
- 49 -
and a secretary--
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
611111
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
steno,
25X1
T/O was
The PBS liaison architects,
and Ambrose, were attached to this staff. The
increased in October 1955 to provide for two
architect-engineers and an additional secretary; and
on 26 November 1955 SPS became the Building Planning
Staff (BPS) and a separate staff element of the office
of the Director of Logistics. 88/ On 19 November 1955
the DDS terminated the Special Subcommittee on Space
Requirements headed by
the
DD/OL. This group had been established on 8 July 1955
to make .a comprehensive review of Agency space require-
...
ments in relation to the proposed standards being
developed by the RECD Special Projects Staff. 89/
The responsibilities of this subcommittee were then
assumed by BPS.
tem0
Critical Coordination Period, 1955-1956
? Continued expansion and rising construction costs
had made the original 1951 Agency building authorization
of $38 million obviously inadequate.* In mid-February
* Even as late as the spring of 1954, however, there
were those who thought it might be possible to "build
for considerably less than $38,000,000." In March 1954
Senator Homer Ferguson (R-Mich.), who was handling CIA
appropriations in the Senate, advised Dulles that it
would be unwise to ask for funds for building at that
time. 90/
- 50.-
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
1955 the DDS was informed by members of the building
committee that the new cost estimate was $55 million
for a structure to house
high hopes that .the full amount
the Bureau of the Budget (BOB).
employees; and he had
would be approved by
91/ The story of
the subsequent negotiations with the Congress will
be discussed in detail in the history of the Office
of the Legislative Counsel, but some of the recollec-
tions of Walter Pforzheimer, one of the Agency's
principals in these activities, are worth recording
here:
- 51-
S.F.CRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
Mai
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECT=
25X1
absent. During the course of our tes-
timony before this subcommittee one of
the Senators complained that our cost
estimates per sq.ft. were quite high.
He then referred to another federal
building under construction, without
naming which one it was, saying it was
being constructed at a considerably lower
average cost per sq.ft. It took some time
to ascertain what building the Senator was
talking about and that that building had a
much higher rate of unimproved space than
we could have in our headquarters. By that
time the Subcommittee and the full Senate
Committee had reduced the
amount to be authorized for construction
to $45 million. The Senate Committee also
felt that the price of $6 million for the
acquisition of private property, should that
be required, was excessive. It reduced this
figure to $1 million'. As the Langley site
was still actively being considered, and
was perhaps favored, the Senate Committee
also added the sum of $8.5 million available
for transfer to the National Capital Plan-
ning Commission and the Interior Department
for the acquisition of land and the necessary
construction of the extension of the George
Washington Memorial Parkway from its then
terminal point at Spout Run to the Langley
site. The committee added the proviso that
if the Langley site were not chosen, the
$8.5 million would not be available for
obligation. Finally, reflecting congressional
and public dismay that World War I and II
temporary buildings had not been demolished,
the Committee directed that at such time as
CIA occupied its new building the Admin-
istrator of GSA was directed to demolish
temporary building space equivalent to that
which CIA would relinquish. Mr. Dulles.
was dismayed at the loss of $5 million in
his construction request and he wrote the
- 52 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
0.ttjiktri?
Committee Chairman requesting that the $5
million be restored in conference as the
budget estimates on which we had based our
requests were extremely tight. The conferees
adopted the Senate Committee version described
above but restored $1 million to the construc-
tion funds making a total of $46 million
for the purpose. 92/
'Pforzheimer, at that time the Legislative Counsel,
recorded the following in his diary on 21 April 1955:
25X1
25X1
2. I called Congressman Broyhill
(R.,Va.) and informed him of thp f---
coming release of the
Act and that we requesting a
total of $56,000,000 therein. Congress-
man Broyhill was appreciative of the
information. He stated that he was in
complete accord with our purposes in this
matter and if needed he would hr. glad to
appear before the Commit-
tee or take up the cudgels on the Floor.
He said he was particularly anxious that
we get into a new building so that the
- 53 -
SECRET
A nr-Nrmitnri Fnr Release 2009/01/16 CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
25X1
mug 25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
old temporary buildings could be destroyed.
Mr. Broyhill went on to state that since
we had told Langley in effect "to go to
hell" Langley had developed a considerable
desire to have the CIA building constructed
there, and County officials were going to
work to try to remove the obstacles to our
coming. Mr. Broyhill stated that in his
opinion CIA should not be stuck with the
cost of the extension of the George Wash-
ington Parkway and that he had so informed
Mr..Brundage, of the Bureau of the Budget.
He closed his conversation with renewed
expression of complete support.
3. In addition to Mr. Broyhill, I in-
formed Mr. Menefee, Administrative Assis-
tant to Senator Byrd, Mr. Hook, Administra-
tive Assistant to Senator Butler, and Mr.
McNeill, Administrative Assistant to Sen-
ator Robertson, that the
Act was on its way to Capitol Hill,
hat in view of their interest in the
building we wished them to know that
contained our request for author-
ization. I also called their attention
to the typographical error. Each in turn
expressed appreciation for our thoughtful-
ness. I told Mr. McNeill that Colonel
White was always available to brief Sena-
tor Robertson if the latter desired more
information concerning our need for a
building. Mr. McNeill said that the
Senator's main interest was that the
building be located in Virginia, but that
he was taking no position as between sites
an
CIA
Because it was the general consensus within the
mai
Agency that it was now the right time to approach
Congress to obtain an appropriation of funds for the
long overdue building, arrangements were made by
-?
-54-
-
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEQ.K.E.1:
the DDS for the DCI to make a formal presentation to
the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC)* and
the National.Capital Regional.Planning Council (NCRPC),
requesting their approval of one of the several site
locations that appeared favorable for the Agency
building. As a result of the formal presentation a
joint committee.was formed consisting of representatives
of the NCPC, the NCRPC, and the Agency. After consider-
able review and discussion with various county planning
members and an'analysis of site locations, a report of
the Joint Committee.was .prepared and forwarded on
7 April 1955 to the NCPC and NCRPC for their considera-
tion and approval.
On 3 and 5 May 1955 the NCRPC and NCPC approved
the Joint Committee's report, which recommended that
0
the CIA application to use a site near
Langley, Virginia be approved with the
understanding that this development will
require Federal assumption of collateral
costs to make the installation operable
and that a radical change of land use in
the area will be entailed. 93/
* The duty of the NCPC under the US Planning Act of
. 1952 was to consult and advise the NCRPC and the local
planning agencies in the territory affected, if US -
Government establishments are located in the environs
.of Washington, D.C.
55 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
The committees approval, however, also contained a
provision requiring.the Agency to consult with the
local planning.agencies, as well as the NCPC and the
NCRPC, on those plans for the integration of the
Agency building into the surrounding community.
Within a period of about six weeks, however, the DDS
recorded that NCPC representatives required further
educating about Agency intentions regarding the
Langley site and consequently,
and I met with Harland
Bartholomew and Jack Nolen, Chairman and
Director, respectively, of the National
Capital Planning Commission, at which
time I briefed them on the current status
of our thinking with regard to the location
of our new building. Although I did not
give them the full "why's and wherefore's,"
they understand that as of now we do not
propose to build in Maryland or the District
of Columbia, that we do not propose to
comply with current dispersion standards,
but that we do propose to build in Virginia
at either the Winkler or Langley properties.
I explained that we had requested $8.5
million to be transferred to the Department
of the Interior for the construction of an
extension to the George Washington Memorial
Parkway. Mr. Nolen said that the National
Capital Planning Commission was responsible
for acquiring the right of way and was not
sure that they had sufficient funds to do
it. He suggested that our language ought
to make provision for the transfer of funds
to them also. Told him that I would have
to look into this. (Have done so with
- 56 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
Lyman Hamilton, Bureau of the Budget, who,
at first, was sure that JaCk Nolen was
wrong; however, on further investigation
he determined that the National Capital
Planning Commission does acquire the right
of way. Accordingly, we must look into
this early Monday morning and see if our
legislation requires any further amendment.) 94/
The controversy over the final site selection,
although basically resolved in favor of Langley, was
to continue, as noted later in this history, for
almost two more years; but the joint NCPC-NCRPC action
late in the spring of 1955 did precipitate a noticeable
flurry of activity among the partisans, both pro and
con, on the Langley site issue. Some of these groups
and individuals and their. applications and agitations
are worth noting at this point because their activities
were to require the attention of senior Agency officials
off and on for the next six or seven years.
Noted for their financial conservatism, the two
Virginia members of the US Senate, Harry F. Byrd and
A. Willis Robertson (both Democrats), were kept informed
on developments related to potential Virginia sites
and were generally handled with kid gloves. 95/ Each
Senator has been identified as having made at least
one approach to obtain contracts or concessions or
- 57 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
develop contacts on behalf of constituents or potential
creditors. In neither instance, however, is there
evidence of attempts that went beyond the bounds of
propriety. 96/ At a later stage in the story of the
new building, in June 1956 when the Agency was seek-
ing a $10-million increase in the appropriation that
had been approved, both Byrd and Robertson were re-
ported to be "deeply concerned about and do not under-
stand the proposed increase of $10,000,000." 97/
The situation of the member of the House of
Representatives from the 10th District in Virginia
(Northern Virginia), Joel T. Broyhill, was consider-
ably different. It has been recorded that at various
times Broyhill attempted to help obtain concessions
or contracts for an architectural firm, a bank, a
catering service, and a jeweler. 98/ That his tactics
may have exceeded the bounds of propriety is evidenced
in the following report of a conversation between
Broyhill and the DDS concerning the architectural
firm:
Congressman Broyhill telephoned Lying
in every way possible to shove the
architectural firm of Willgoos and Chase
down our throats. I told him that the
firm of Harrison and Abramovitz had
- 58 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
definitely been selected and that while
we were sympathetic to associating that
organization with a local architect I
could make no commitments at this time.
I told him that I had no objection to
Willgoos and Chase contacting Harrison
& Ambramovitz or writing to us if they
saw fit. 99/
An even more sour note was struck by Congress-
man Broyhill in the fall of 1959 when he telephoned
White
?
to express his unhappiness about the
fact that his friend,. Mr. [R. Wade]
Pearson had not been given the snack
bar and vending machine concessions
in our new building. ...
He insisted over and over again
that it was not too late for me to
direct that Berlo Caterers be given
this business and he was, in fact,
asking me to do so.
The Congressman was very frank to
say that he felt that his constituents
-- since this was his Congressional
District and since this was a Republican
Administration -- should be given
preferential treatment over all others.
... I told him that we negotiated all
of our contracts for CIA without regard
to the political affiliation of compet-
itive contractors. I also told him
that the mere fact that he was interested
in any contractor would certainly receive
our most serious consideration but that
I could not promise him that his constit-
uents would always be favored; in fact,
I was rather emphatic that they would
not be favored unless they were competi-
tive in every respect.
- 59 -
SECRET
Fnr Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEGRET
While the entire conversation was quite
friendly it was also rather frank, with
Congressman Broyhill making no bones about
his belief that his Republican constituents
during the Republican Administration ought
to receive preferential treatment over all
others and My equally insistent stand that
I felt duty-bound to insure that our con-
tracts were fairly negotiated and admin-
istered without regard to the political
affiliations of the competing contractors.
I told him that we had made no determina-
tions as yet about concessionaires other
than the snack bars and vending machines
and that if we later decided to have a
bank, drugstore, etc., I would let him
know.* 100/
In addition to those who made their appeals
for concessions through their Congressmen, other
legitimate Virginia business interests approached
the Agency to inquire about prospects for space in,
or near, the new building. Banks, savings institu-
tions, a confectioner, and retail stores were among
those represented; and the replies from the DDS in-
forming them that it had been decided that no con-
cessions would be available were prompt and uniformly
* On 31 March 1961 the DDS did send a letter to
Congressman Broyhill telling him that except for the
vending machine and cafeteria concessions and the
barber shop, all to.be operated by GSI and/or the
Virginia Society for the Blind, there would be no -
other commercial concessions in the building. 101/
- 60 -
SECRET -
Pnr PRIesse 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
OW
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
courteous.* 102/ Some of those .who had real estate
holdings in the area of the new building were more
strident, devious, and deceptive; but their efforts
to "con" the Agency into support of particular
developments or other projects were to no avail.** 104/
Like their counterparts in Virginia, politicians
at all levels of government in Maryland exhibited
an active interest in the location of the new Head-
quarters Building. The DDS reported that
Mr. Baynard of Senator [John Marshall]
Butler's office telephoned seeking in-
formation concerning the additional
$10,000,000 which we need for our
* Following much tugging and hauling with private
interests, the food service concession was granted
to GSI, and that organization was also asked to
supervise the establishment and operation of the
barber shop in the Headquarters Building. In order
to avoid any controversy with the state, the Virginia
Society for the Blind was given permission to operate
two snack bars in the Headquarters Building. 103/
** The White Diary Notes show a rather unusual appli-
cant as follows: "Stan Grogan [an Agency spokesman]
called with reference to an inquiry he had recieved
from Mr. Vincent Smith of McGraw-Hill Publishing
Company, Inc. who wanted to meet with us and talk
about the interior arrangement of our Ilew building.
Agreed with him that the architect was still drawing
plans and that we had not yet reached a stage where
an interview of this kind would be appropriate." 105/
The company probably hoped to set up a retail book
store in the new building.
- 61 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
awl
and
mi ?
building and very obviously fishing for
information which Senator Butler might
use in favor of a Maryland site. 106/*
Mr. Jenkins of Senator [J. Glenn] Beall's
office telephoned on behalf of a constituent
who wishes to operate a drugstore in our
new building. I explained to Mr. Jenkins
that we had no present plans for this type
?
of installation but that we would be glad
to hear from his constituent just in case
something developed at a later date. 108/
Senator Beall, like others of the Maryland
Congressional contingent, did let the Agency and the
NCPC know that he thought more suitable building
sites were available in Maryland. 109/ In this he
was joined by a handful of Congressmen -- Senator
Matthew Neeley (D-W.Va.), Senator Everett Dirksen
(R-I11.) and Representative John McMillan (D-S.C.)
who took issue with the plan to locate the Agency
at Langley, favoring some other Virginia site (the
Shirley highway location was specified by Dirksen,
among other people. 110/
* Relationships with Senator Butler apparently were .
maintained on a friendly level; the DCI sent the Senator
a "Dear John" letter which ended: "I want to express
my sincere appreciation for the friendly and construc-
tive attitude which you have maintained throughout the
long and difficult process of reaching a decision on
this important matter." 107/
- 62 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
mai
lot
wait
asi
mom
owl
aim
awl
iNg
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEURri.
Both the Congressman from the Annapolis district',
Representative Richard E. Lankford, and the Governor
of Maryland, Theodore R. McKeldin, showed interest
in having the Agency locate the new building at a
site in Greenbelt; but there is no record of undue
pressure being applied by either. Gov. McKeldin,
in fact was legitimately concerned with cooperating
with the Agency in the matter of the construction
of the Cabin John Bridge and its approaches and access
roads. 111/ Another Congressman interested in having
the Agency build in Maryland was Frank W. Boykin
(D-Ala.), It seems that Representative Boykin had
5,000 acres of land near Waldorf that he was willing
to sell (presumably in whole or part) to the Agency.*
Calls about the Boykin property apparently reached
the DDS from Dulles and from. Homer Grunther of the
Legislative Staff of the White House. The DDS told
both of them that the Boykin offer was "completely
* Boykin subsequently -- and while still a Congress-
man -- was indicted and convicted on charges of con-
spiracy and conflict of interest growing out of a
Maryland Savings and Loan Association scandal.
Boykin did not appeal the judgment; he paid a fine '
and received a suspendedjail sentence. 112/
- 63
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEURE.L.
out of the question according to our present cri-
teria." 113/*
In addition to the interest displayed by area
and other Congressional representatives, the local
dal
jurisdictions in Virginia also had a vital interest
in the location of the Agency headquarters, with the
Fairfax County Board of Supervisors and the Fairfax
Chamber of Commerce among the most vigorous proponents
of the Langley site. Sewage, water supply, and access
roads were of principal concern to both opponents
and proponents of the Langley site, and from 1954
until construction was well under way these issues
required the personal attention of the DDS, the
Building Planning Staff, the Office of Logistics,
and the Legislative Counsel. 114/ In fact the DDS
0.? reported to the Director that I had been
appointed without my knowledge or con-
sent to the Advisory Council of our
Economic and Industrial Development
Committee of Fairfax County and explained
the restricted role I would have to play
in order to avoid conflict of interest
charges. The Director thought that I
should by all means serve on this commit-
tee and asked me to consult with.Larry
owl
* Boykin served in the House of Representatives
during the period 1935-1963.
- 64 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
sal
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
Houston in drafting the appropriate re-
ply. This, I have done. 115/
It was well that the supporters of the Langley
site were willing to be heard; there was persistent
minority resistance from various Langley, McLean,
and Dranesville area residents regarding this choice
for the new building site. The most vocal of the
group was a Roger D. Fisher. Beginning with "Letters
to the Editor," Fisher addressed his objections to
the Fairfax County Supervisors, the National Capital
Planning Commission, the DCI, the DDS, the Director
of the Office of Defense Mobilization (Arthur S.
Flemming), the Assistant to the President (Sherman
Adams) and other White House staff members, the
Deputy Director of the Bureau of the Budget (Percival
F. Brundage)., and a host of Congressmen. 116/ Fisher's
arguments on !"security," "dispersal," and sewage/
sanitation were refuted time and again by responsible
federal officials. The Washington newspapers,
particularly the Washington Post and the Times Herald,
however, chose to side with the minority opinion in
- 65 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
NMI
11^11
lid
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bEk..).K.Z.,
opposing the Langley site.* The adverse publicity
was countered by the senior representatives of the
Agency who, as noted, availed themselves of every
opportunity to appear before local citizens groups
and civic service organizations in the Langley-
McLean area. 117/
Before the Congressional hearings scheduled
for 15 July 1955, the Agency took great pains to
coordinate fully and staff adequately all require-
ments and to obtain whatever official clearances
were necessary to the preparation of its presenta-
tion to Congress. On 14 June 1955 Dulles and White
met at the White House with Governor Sherman Adams,
Special Assistant to the President; Arthur Flemming,
Director of the Office of Defense Mobilization;
MIN General Bragdon, Special Adviser to the President
on Construction; Belcher, Assistant Director of the
* Excerpts from the Washington Post and the Times
Herald opposing the Agency locating at Langley are
on file in the Historical Intelligence Collection.
In addition, the HIC files also contain several
ask adverse publications that are worthy of review,
which were prepared and issued by the local minority
group of residents from the McLean-Langley-Dranes-
ville District.
- 66
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
aid
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
I
Bureau of the Budget; and Colonel Andrew Goodpasture,
Staff Secretary at the White House, to determine the
Administration's position on the proposed location
of the Agency's new building. The DDS recorded the
following:
1. As a result of my discussions
add with Mr. Dulles concerning the referenced
memorandum of conversation with General
Bragdon, he telephoned Sherman Adams,
Assistant to the President, and a meeting
was arranged at the White House for 12:00
Noon on 14 June 1955 for the specific
purpose of firming up the position of
the "Administration" on the location of.
the proposed new CIA headquarters build-
ing. Those in attendance were: Governor
Old Adams (for a part of the meeting), Colonel
Goodpasture, Staff Secretary at the White
House, Dr. Flemming, Director, Office of
Defense Mobilization, General Bragdon,
Special Advisor to the President on Con-
struction, Mr. Belcher, Assistant Director,
Bureau of the Budget, Mr. Dulles, and me.
2. Colonel Goodpasture reviewed the
substance of the meeting which Mr. Dulles
and I had with the President on 7 May 1955
to discuss this subject. Briefly, he stated
that (1) the President had indicated that
we should not locate within the City of
Washington, but, at the same time, pointed
out that we need not necessarily comply
with current dispersion standards, and
(2) that he wanted us to get on the out-
? skirts of the City, as far out a we
thought we could without hampering our
did
activities, and believed that in view of
the fact that our Relocation Center was
? 25)0 we should be
- 67
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
OMNI
mal
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bELi.K.U.,
located in that general direction. He
went on to state that the President had
related his experiences during the war
and felt strongly that it was not essen-
tial for the Director of Central Intel-
ligence to be in the highly congested
area of the District. Insofar as the
possible selection of the Langley or
Winkler properties was concerned, he
indicated that the President had made
no hard and fast decision in this matter
but had stated that either of these sites
would be acceptable to him.
3. The second point centered around
the question of whether or not permitting
CIA to locate at either the Langley or
Winkler locations would set a precedent
and thereby make it difficult to require
other agencies to comply with ODM standards.
Dr. Flemming spoke up and said that he
had considered this matter both with Mr.
Dulles and the Cabinet and had reached
the conclusion that there were significant
and sufficient reasons for making an ex-
ception in this instance. He emphasized
?that this exception should not be regarded
as a precedent for other Government agencies,
that CIA had acted properly in processing
its request, and that other agencies
desiring to do so could submit similar
actions which would be considered on their
individual merits.
General Bragdon made a strong pitch to
have us moved further out and attempted
to influence Dr. Flemming in his position.
However, Dr. Flemming held a firm position
and said that what he would like to get
out of this would be the construction ...
25:0 if necessary ... of, possibly, austere
facilities at which we would
locate some of our people and give them
an intensive training program so that in
...? the event that the CIA headquarters were
- 68 -?
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
completely wiped out they would know how
to carry on. We discussed this a bit and
I indicated that we already had people
there and probably had room for more ...
perhaps as many as 1,000 or 1,500 ... but
that these would not be the people who
would normally succeed in the chain of
command. At any rate, we assured Dr.
Flemming that we would study this matter
and Mr. Dulles Said, in effect, that we
would do something along these lines.
(This, I regard as almost a positive com-
mitment to Dr. Flemming.)
5. The next question was how to handle
this with the Congress. Mr. Dulles advised
of the
had suggested
that we might obtain the approval of his
Committee and that of
concerning the location we finally chose.
I pointed out that a good argument against
this should be that since we were required
by law to consult with the National Capital.
Planning Commission and the National Capital
Regional Planning Council it seemed unnec-
essary to obtain the specific approval of
Congress, and stated that if this were
required the location itself might get to
be a political football. It was unani-
mously agreed that we would resist any
attempt by the Congress to pick the site.
6. We discussed briefly the use of
"prior year" funds. Mr. Belcher remained
Silent during this discussion. I assured
him that we were not advocating this but
had merely pointed out that it wi?.s possible
and would avoid a new appropriation.
7. At the conclusion of the discussion,
Governor Adams turned to Colonel Goodpasture
- 69 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
and asked him if he felt the President
would approve of either the Winkler or
Langley properties. Colonel Goodpasture
assured him that the President would, and
Governor Adams then said, "O.K., let's
go ahead." 118/
As noted previously, Senator Byrd wholeheartedly
supported the Agency's move to Virginia, as did Repre-
senative Broyhill, who believed that the Fairfax
County officials would eventually overcome any ob-
stacles either to funding or to the sewage, water,
and related utility matters required for the Agency
to locate at Langley. As a result of private
petitions on both sides of the issue, the Agency
found that the Langley-McLean area. residents favored
CIA's location at Langley by a ratio of 3.5 to 1.
This coincided with a poll of the Dranesville area
conducted by Representative Broyhill; the Congress-
man's poll also showed that in Fairfax County the
ratio was an overwhelming 4 to 1 in favor of the
Langley site. 119/ The Fairfax County Board of
Supervisors, the senior government unit of the county,
on four separate occasions had expressed its favor-
able view to CIA locating at Langley. The official
planning bodies of Arlington, Fairfax, and Loudoun
- 70 -
SECRET
,x rrur1 Fnr Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Counties, the District of Columbia, and the City of
Falls Church had also favored Langley.
The hearing on 15 July 1955 before the Senate
Committee on Appropriations, Defense Subcommittee,
was held to permit CIA to present its overall build-
ing plans to Congress. The DCI specifically indi-
cated the desirability of the Langley site; then
came statements from those favoring as well as those
opposing CIA's plans.* Three long hours of testimony
were involved, and because the hearings resulted in
consideration of two prime locations -- the Langley
site and the alternative site in Alexandria, the
Winkler property** -- the DCI requested funds solely
for preparation of detailed studies, plans, and
specifications to be used for the selection of the
most advantageous site. In addition to the DCI,
several other staunch supporters of the Langley
* See excerpts from HR 7278, US Senate, 84th
Congress, 1st Session, Senate Appropriations Com-
mittee. In HIC files.
** The "Winkler Tract" was located between N.
Beauregard Street and Henry. G. Shirley Highway in
the vicinity of Seminary Road in the western limits'
of the city of Alexandria. See mapl,inside back
cover, Volume II.
- 71 -
SECRET
Aooroved For Release 2009/01/16 CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
location emerged during the Congressional hearings.
Among those were R. M. Townsend, the Executive Direc-
tor of the Fairfax County Chamber of Commerce, and
W. C. Mills, President of the Chamber of Commerce;
they submitted to the members of the Senate Sub-
Committee on Appropriations separate
which are summarized below:
With reference to the location
CIA at Langley, Virginia[:1
statements,
of the
1. The overwhelming majority of the
people in Fairfax-County, in which Langley
is located, eagerly welcome this fine
agency herein our county. We believe
the vote for it would be 98 or 99 percent.
2. The Fairfax County Government, in
a 6-to-1 vote of the Board of Supervisors,
has gone on record heartily welcoming the
CIA. The one vote cast in dissent was
not in objection to the agency, but on a
disagreement as to procedures.
3. The Fairfax County Planning Com-
mission has likewise gone on record for
the CIA at the Langley site.
4. The McLean Business Association,
composed of twenty-three business leaders
in the community adjacent to the CIA site,
has formally gone on record inviting it
there.
S. The Great Falls Grange, with 242
members in the area concerned, went on
record March. 16, 1955, welcoming the CIA
to Langley. A copy of this letter is
being sent to the Subcommittee today.
- 72 -
SECRET
A nnrnved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
6. The Fairfax County Chamber of
Commerce, with a county-wide membership
of 500 of the foremost business and civic
leaders of the county, has likewise for-
mally gone on record for the CIA at
Langley, doing so, to the best of my know-
ledge, without a single dissenting voice.
7. Expressions eagerly in favor of this
splendid agency's location at Langley have
been voiced to us by countless leading
residents of the Langley-McLean area, and
inquiries among these convince us that in
that area sentiment is overwhelmingly for
location of the CIA there.
8. A very few of the residents of the
area concerned voice anxiety that the CIA
there would as they say "Injure the com-
munity",. So far as we can determine, this
opinion comes from only an extremely small
minority, and the appended letters support
this view.
9. The spaciousness of the land avail-
able, its parklike character, the high
standards of the CIA, convince us that the
CIA there will best aid us in preserving
the attractions of the locality. We can-
not believe that the site will go long
unused, and the CIA is by far the best
agency to be put upon it.
10. The parkway road extension has
long been overdue as a transportation need.
Recent Civil Defense practice tests show
the grave urgency of completing it as a
requirement for speedy avacuation from
Washington and Arlington.
11. Fairfax County's pledge to have
sewer connections ready in time to service
the added population at the site represents -
the expediting of a facility already over-
due. Accelerations of road improvements and
water service by location of the CIA at
Langley will greatly benefit the area.
- 73 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEGILL,".1.?
12. ..These considerations and the known
high standards of the CIA in personnel,
assuring us of fine new neighbors, prompt
the dispatch of this information to you.
by the instruction of our County Chamber
President, Mr. W. C. Wills, on behalf of
our Directors and 500 Members.*
Another firm supporter at the hearing was Carlton C.
Massey, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of the
County of Fairfax, who furnished supporting testimony
in favor of CIA locating at Langley and; in addition,
submitted a prepared statement indicating that
The Fairfax County Board of Supervisors has
consistently welcomed the CIA to locate its
office building in Fairfax County and has
expressed this welcome by formal action on
at least three occasions. On 8 March 1955
the board passed a motion inviting the CIA
to locate in Fairfax County.
On May 4, 1955, a resolution was adopted by
this board cordially inviting the CIA to use
the U.S. Bureau of Public Roads property
at Langley in Fairfax County, Virginia, for
its future offices, and assuring the coop-
eration of the county government in all
matters under its responsibility.
On May 18, 1955, a resolution was adopted
by this board of county supervisors giv-
ing assurance that within 2 years the
county would make available sewage dis-
posal facilities to the proposed site at
Langley with no part of the initial cost
to be borne by the Federal Government and
subject to the customary connection charges
* The Fairfax Chamber of Commerce put these recommen-
dations into a public-relations document called "Fairfax
County Welcomes the CIA." (See HS/HC 876.)
- 74 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
owl
Mid
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
and quarterly service charges as have
been or may be established for similar
service in the County.
Officials of the county have conferred
with officials of the 'Virginia Depart-
ment of Highways and the Governor of
the Commonwealth of Virginia for the
purpose of determining to what extent
this State Agency may be able to pro-
vide improved highway facilities to
serve this proposed installation.
The Fairfax County Planning Commission
has cooperated in this connection by
making its staff available for the
preparation of information in connec-
tion therewith.
During the hearing the very vocal Roger Fisher
was in the forefront in objecting to CIA locating
in Langley. Although Fisher and proponents of the
?mi
Alexandria site made a valiant effort in advocating
their dissenting views,* the presentation by the
Honorable Armistead Boothe, Virginia Senator from
the City of Alexandria, worked adversely to their
cause. When asked by Senator Chavez whether or not
he desired more federal buildings in the state,
Senator Boothe replied that "Not only would it be
* The President of the Alexandria Chamber of Com-
merce went on record with the Senate Appropriations.
Committee prior to the hearing, and his letter em-
phasized the greater economies which would follow
from use of the Winkler tract. 120/
- 75 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
awl
aml
mia
NMI
mai
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
good for CIA but also good for Alexandria...." The
only site worthy of consideration in Alexandria, of
course, was the Winkler property. In concluding his
testimony -- his was the last formal presentation
from the dissenting side -- Senator Boothe stated:
I would like to say one thing Mr.
Chairman [Sen. Dennis Chavez]. I want
the record perfectly clear, I am the
attorney for Mr. Winkler. I want that
to be known to this Committee, because
I am not here representing Mr. Winkler.
I am here on behalf of the city of
Alexandria.
The Congressmen chose to support the Agency
position and on 15 July 1955 Public Law 161 (84th
Congress) authorized $46 million for the construction
of the Headquarters Building in addition to $3
million for acquisition of land and starting of
construction of the George Washington Memorial
Parkway and for the development of detailed plans
and specifications for the building. Because of
the inaccuracies and misleading statements presented
by the opposition groups at the Senate Appropriations
Subcommittee's hearing,* the DI subsequently forwarded
* The testimony of Rear Admiral Neill Phillips, USN
(Ret.) who was "appearing as Respresentative [sic] of
the Progressive Citizens Association of Georgetown
(footnote continued on following page)
- 76 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
a clarifying memorandum to Senator Chavez on 18 July
1955. 122/ Three days later the DCI's memorandum to
the Senator was followed by a letter from White, the
DDS, requesting an amendment to the language of Chap-
ter III of H. R. 7278, the Supplemental Appropriations
Bill, to the effect
that the amount of $3 million approved
by the House Appropriations Committee
be increased to $7 million to provide
for, in addition to the development
of detail[ed] plans and specifications,
the acquisition of land and the starting
of construction of the George Washington
Memorial Parkway to the Langley site. 123/
The Senate Appropriations Committee did approve
the $3 million for planning that the House Appropria?
tions Committee had previously authorized, but they
also reduced the amount available for the purchase
of land for the building from $1 million to $350,000,
should a non-government-owned site be selected. In
addition the committee authorized the transfer of
(approximately 900 members) and the Audubon Society
of ;the District of Columbia (approximately 1200 mem-
bers in the Greater Washington area).....[who had]
also been asked to speak for the Middle States Divi-
sion of the American Canoe Association" 121/ illus-
trates the nature of some of the misinformation that
the anti-Langley forces presented to the Senate
committee. See Appendix G for the Phillips testimony.
-77; -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
gal
suri
mei
mat
awl
doi
.00
awl
wts1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bkitjt(.e,
$4 million to acquire the land and begin construc-
tion of the parkway.
On 26 July 1955 the DCI addressed a letter to
the Honorable George H. Mahon, Chairman, Defense
Subcommittee, House Committee on Appropriations,
in which he noted that
The Senate Appropriations Committee
has now approved the sum of $3,000,000
for the preparation of detailEed) plans
and specifications and $4,000,000 for the
extension of the Parkway, with a proviso
that if CIA does not locate at Langley,
a sum of not to exceed $350,000 shall be
available for the acquisition of a site
elsewhere.
It is my earnest hope that the House
Appropriations Committee will accept the
action of the Senate Appropriations
Committee.* 124/
The positions of the two Appropriations Commit-
tees were compromised; and on 4 August 1955 Congress
appropriated a total of $5.5 million** for the purposes
noted above in the White letter; and almost a year
later (27 July 1956) the remaining sums were
* The DCI's letter to Representative Mahon is
attached as Appendix H.
* *
Public Law 219, 84th Congress.
78 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
wog
wtail
arisi
ow,
owl
mid
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEGKE1.
appropriated in the amount of $49 million* to con-
struct the building and to finish the parkway to the
site. 125/
On 11 August 1955, in an effort to insure the
consent and approval "of the intent of Congressional
Leaders' as well as all federal and state planning
authorities, the Agency entered into a contract with
the firm of Gilmore D. Clarke** and Michael Rapuano,
Consulting Engineers and Landscape Architects, 145
East 32nd., Street, New York, New York. A comprehen-
sive "Report on the Proposed Location for a New
Headquarters for CIA", dated 25 October 1955, was
prepared and used to compare the advantages and
disadvantages of the Langley site and the Winkler
tract in particular, as well as other possible
locations of at least 100 acres. The report cover-
ed the Agency criteria for site location; the per-
centage location of residences of staff employees;
Public Law 814, 84th Congress.
** Clarke was a former member and chairman of the
Commission of Fine Arts, Executive Office of the
President, 1937-1950. As noted later in the history,
Clarke and Rapuano also became affiliated with Har-
rison and Abramovitz in planning the new building.
- 79 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
ref
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
the impact on Fairfax County; and the adequacy of
water supply, sewerage disposal, electric power,
telephone, and other utility services, with many
appended maps, charts, and traffic surveys.* 126/
Because the Clarke and Rapuano Report played an
important role in the final decision to locate at
Langley and to abandon the Winkler site, the results
of the study are summarized below:
SECURITY
WINKLER SITE: LANGLEY SITE:
1. Too low in relation 1. At Langley CIA
to the Shirley Highway and , would occupy 140 acres
surrounding areas. of a 740-acre Government
reservation. Any develop-
ment for the Central
* Examined in retrospect the Clarke and Rapuano site
report leaves much to the imagination. Despite mention,
of the fact that they visited most of the potential
sites, no reasons are given for the rejection of any
specific site except the Winkler tract. In fact, the
focus of the report is on the only two sites which
were specifically identified, the Winkler tract and
Langley. Even the Clarke and Rapuano map purporting
to show the sites that they visited fails to provide
specific identification of such sites except for the
two already mentioned. Throughout the research for
this history, in fact, it has been almost impossible
to find hard evidence cited by any of the responsible
ims? individuals or agencies for rejecting a prospective
site.
NEP
- 80 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECURITY
(continued)
WINKLER SITE:
EXPANSION
LANGLEY SITE:
Intelligence Agency
within this site will
be such that a wide belt
of forest land will be
left around the periphery
in a manner aiding to
provide the desired
security.
2. Higher than sur-
rounding areas. 185 to
280 feet above sea level.
Excellent screening from
nearby roads.
POSSIBILITIES
WINKLER SITE:
1. By the time construc-
tion is completed, this site
would be virtually surrounded
by commercial and other prop-
erties precluding any possible
expansion if it should ever
become necessary.
WINKLER SITE:
LANGLEY SITE:
1. Plenty of Govern-
ment owned property
available if expansion
becomes necessary.
TRAFFIC SITUATION*
1. A majority of the em-
ployees living in the District
of Columbia and Maryland (68
LANGLEY SITE:
1. With the completion
of the George Washington
Parkway from its present
* Map 2, inside back cover of Volume II, is a copy-of
the roadway system map of the two sites which appeared
in the report.
- 81 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUX-t;
TRAFFIC SITUATION
(continued)
WINKLER SITE:
percent) would be forced to
pass through the Pentagon net-
work at the busiest hours of
the day, both morning and
evening, together with the
traffic going to and departing
from the Pentagon. The
Shirley Highway has now more
than reached its capacity,
particularly from a point
north of the Parkfairfax
interchange to the Potomac
River crossings, and even if
it should be widened to six '
lanes as far south as King
Street it would still be in-.
adequate to accommodate the
Concentrated peakload that
would result from mere' than
3000 automobiles of the CIA
headquarters staff during
the morning and evening hours
2. It would require an
estimated three hours and
eighteen minutes to empty
the parking lot at the
Winkler site into the
Shirley Highway traffic.
3. From the long range
point of view, the traffic
situation at the Winkler site
would become worse as time
went on in view of the in-
creased use of the Shirley
Highway by other developments
such as Springfield, which
is growing rapidly.
- 82 -
LANGLEY SITE:
terminus at Spout Run to
the Langley site, together
with the improvements ca-
ready planned to the Key
Bridge, CIA traffic can
be accommodated without any
additional improvements.
The George Washington
Memorial Parkway has been
authorized since 1930 and
is badly needed whether
or not the Central Intel-
ligence Agency goes to
Langley. Congress has
made specific provision for
its completion now if CIA
goes to Langley. Traffic
to Langley would be moving
largely in the opposite
direction to the concentrated
flow and would avoid passing
through the congested area
of Washington, the Pentagon
network, etc.
2. It will require one
hour and fifteen minutes
to empty the parking lot
from the Langley site.
3. From a long-range
point of view, the traffic
situa4on at the Langley
site will gain further
superiority over the Winkler
site with the construction
of the Outer Loop Freeway
and the proposed bridge at
or near Cabin John.
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-n
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEk.;,KET
TRAFFIC SITUATION
(continued)
WINKLER SITE: LANGLEY SITE:
4. The above points
make the Langley site
satisfactory in the be-
ginning with continued
improvement as the arterial
system in this general area
already planned takes form.
PERSONNEL PROBLEMS
Residences
District of Columbia, Northwest
37%
District of Columbia, Northeast
5%
District of Columbia, Southwest
1%
District of Columbia, Southeast
7%
Arlington County, Virginia
15%
Fairfax County, Virginia
8%
City of Alexandria, Virginia
8%
Montgomery County, Maryland
11%
Prince Georges County, Maryland
7%
Miscellaneous
1%
*****************
WINKLER SITE:
1. Inconvenient for the
majority of employees who would
have to travel long distances
to and from the site through
the congeSted area of Washing-
ton, through the Pentagon net-
work at the busiest hours of
the day, both morning and
night, together with the traf-
fic going to and departing
from the Pentagon and over
an inadequate arterial system.
- 83 -
LANGLEY SITE:
1. With the authorized
construction of the ex-
tension to the George Wash-
ington Memorial Parkway,
very convenient to the
majority of CIA employees.
More convenient, in fact,
than CIA's present head-
quarters. Traffic to and
from site moving in the
opposite direction from
the major flow, avoiding
SECRET -
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
are
?1111
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEU,KE
WINKLER SITE:
The only alternative to this
would be a major relocation of
the residences of employees to
the Alexandria area.
LANGLEY SITE:
almost entirely the con-
gested area of downtown
Washington. No necessity
for any major relocation
of personnel residences.
2. Adequate acreage
available to insure spotting
of parking lots near entrances,
etc. A dignified setting of
which the country would be
proud is insured. Working
conditions for the employees
would be the most ideal.
WATER, SEWER, POWER PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, ETC.
Guaranteed at both sites and at no capital cost
to the Federal Government -- Government would merely
become a paying customer for services rendered.
COST
With the exception of $8.5 million to extend the
George Washington Memorial Parkway from its present
terminus at Spout Run to the Langley site, the cost to
the Federal Government will be the same at either site.
The extension to the George Washington Memorial Park-
way has been on the Statute books since 1930. Certainly
it is badly needed now whether or not CIA locates at
Langley. There will be few improvements made which
ultimately would not ?be made in the course of time.
.00 If the Langley site is selected the parkway, of necessity,
will be constructed sooner than it otherwise might
be. The same will be true of other highway and public
utility improvements. However, the extension of the
Parkway and planned improvements to the Key Bridge
and Highway No. 1,23 are the only improvements essential
mio to accommodate CIA traffic to and from the Langley
site. The cost of other improvements, most of which
are already planned for this area, should definitely
not be attached to the CIA project itself.
Mei
AWN
me.
- 84 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEU.K.V11.
ZONING
The character of the Langley area, which will
enable us to have the necessary security arrangements,
is a very strong factor in its favor. CIA would like
to see the present character of the area maintained
insofar as possible. If the zoning board of appeals
representing the people of Fairfax County upholds the
zoning scheme as at present planned, there need be
no cause for concern. In these circumstances the CIA
headquarters cannot help but become a distinct asset
to the. county.:
LOCATING IN VIRGINIA
The traffic situation. alone, being what it is
at the Winkler' site, is of 'great significance. It is
highly improbable that there .are sites in Virginia
other than the Langley site to which a satisfactory
traffic situation would obtain and almost certainly
none Which would compare with the Langley site.
Clarke and Rapuano concluded their report by stating
that
the fact remains that the site at
Langley is, in our opinion, the best
possible site we know to be available
which meets the established criteria.
We unhesitatingly recommend it.
The next hurdles to overcome were the NCRPC and
the NCPC, both. of which had to give general approval
of CIA location plans before the Agency could proceed
with architectural and engineering arrangements.
Copies of the Clarke.,Rapuano Report were forwarded
by the DCI to both organizations, and on 5 December
1955 the NCRPC met and voted 5 to 3 in favor of the
- 85 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
-
25X1
on.
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
Langley site. A temporary setback occurred, however,
when the NCPC voted 6 to 5 against the Agency locating
its building in Langley.
After the many planning sessions and discussions
that had been held and the mass of correspondence
that had changed hands before the Agency's presenta-
tions to the NCRPC and the NCPC on the Langley site,*
there was a period of depression and momentary panic
following the adverse decision of the NCPC. The DDS
reported that following a "long talk" with Baird
Evans, operator of the Evans Coffee Shop and a strong
supporter of the Langley site, who wanted to "battle"
the NCPC decision,
[I] told him that I could not offer him
any advice at this time and that we did
not know exactly what we were going to
do until we received and analyzed the
report from the National Capital Planning
Commission. 127/
Even Dulles appears to have had some second
thoughts about Langley following the NCPC's turn-down
of the site. The DDS noted that "Mr. Dulles saw
this morning and was encouraged by
* The White Diary Notes record such activities on
13 September, 17-21 October, 29 October, 21-25 November,
and 29 November, among others.
- 86 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
rot
sal
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
his indication that he would be willing to support
the location of our new building in the District." 128/*
Shortly after the turn of the new year (1956), the
DDS "agreed with Kirk [Lyman F. Kirkpatrick, Inspector
General of CIA] to sit down with Norman Paul [IG
staff] and Mr. Dulles to discuss strategy on the
building. I believe they feel that we should again
abandon Langley." 129/'
By mid-January 1956, however, there was a
noticeable change in the tone of the DDS's reports on
the Langley situation; and attempts by the Federal
City Council to elicit Agency interest in locating
within the District of Columbia fell on barren ground. 130/
In part this may have been the result of a meeting
that Dulles had with Sherman Adams and Colonel Good-
pasture on 5 January 1956 to discuss
the President's previously expressed view
that CIA should not locate in the District
us" of Columbia.
'Both. Mr. Adams and. Colonel Goodpasture
stated that they felt the President would
..?
?
adhere to his original view that CIA should
locate outside of the District. Mr. Adams
* Emphasis added by SSHO.
- 87 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
did not seem particularly disturbed by
the fact that the National Capital Plan-
ning Commission had recommended against
the Langley site by a close vote, or by
the fact that certain newspapers and
groups of individuals were carrying on a
vigorous campaign to insure that CIA did
not locate at Langley.
It was agreed that the problem of the
CIA building and other CIA problems
should be discussed with the President
upon his return to Washington. Mr. Dulles
indicated that he also felt that Congres-
sional leaders should be consulted before
any final decision of [sic] the location
of the building is made. 131/
With this kind of support the DCI, the DDCI,
and the DDS concentrated their efforts on making
personal contact with NCPC members, especially
several new members,* and on helping prepare the
DCI's memorandum to the Chairman of the NCPC request-
ing reconsideration of the adverse NCPC decision. 133/
On 2 February 1956 the commission met again and voted
7 to 5 in favor of the Langley site. 134/
* One of the new members who voted favorably on the
Langley site was Brigadier General David H. Tulley who
had replaced Mr. Leon Zach on the National Capital
Planning Commission as the Army Engineers' representa-
tive, The DDS reported "Through my efforts and those
of General Cabell [the DOC], we were able to convince
him that he should reverse the Army Engineers('] vote,
which he did at the meeting on 2 February." 132/
- 88 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
J.
Upon receiving the favorable NCPC decision,
the Director forwarded copies of his correspondence
with the NCPC chairman to approximately 20 Congres-
sional and State leaders, including Representative
Clarence Cannon, Chairman of the House Committee on
Appropriations, and Senator Carl Hayden, Chairman of
the Senate Committee on Appropriations. In this
transmittal to the Congressmen, the Director extended
his appreciation to all of those involved during the
long and difficult process of reaching this final
decision, which placed the Agency in a position to
proceed with plans and preliminary work in accordance
with authorizing legislation and appropriations ap-
proved by Congress.
One remaining major problem confronting the
Agency was noted by the CIA Legislative Counsel at
the time as follows:
It would apparently be impossible to
house all the CIA employees in a build-
ing which could be constructed for the
$46 million initially authorized by the
Congress. It could barely be done, if
at all, with the $50 million whiph the
Agency had originally requested from the
Congress and, since the authorizing leg-
islation of 1955, construction prices
had risen about 5.7% with some prospects
of a similar rise in the forthcoming
- 82 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
year. At this point Mr. Dulles, on the
basis of advice received from his staff,
felt that he should ask the Congress in
1956 for $10 million additional authori-
zation as well as for the remaining $49
million of the original authorization
for the building and the Parkway. He
discussed this matter with key govern-
ment officials and key leaders on Capitol
Hill. The. latter were not very receptive
at this point, although many of them ex-
pressed sympathy with our problem in
response to Mr.. Dulles' oral briefings
and the subsequent letters which he sent
them. . In May 1956, Senator Russell,
whose wisdom in such matters was out-
standing, advised the Director that this
would not be a good time to seek additional
authorization, due to the fact that it
was late in the session and in a Presi-
dential election year. He felt that CIA
should get as much of the authorized funds
as they could in the current session, and
then perhaps return in January 1957 for
an additional authorization when we had
firmer figures. This was basically the
route that was followed. On 1 June 1956,
the DCI appeared before the. Sub-
committee of the House Appropriations
Committee in support of the remaining
$49 million of our authorization and
this was approved by the Committee and
the House in the Supplemental Appropria-
tion Bill, 1957..
When the bill reached the Senate Ap-
propriations Committee, however, Mr.
Dulles had raised with them the possi-
bility that an additional $10 million
authorization might be required., This
brought the particular opposition of
Senator John Stennis (D.,Miss.) both at
the hearing and in a statement on the
floor of the Senate on 9 July 1956. He
felt that CIA could certainly construct
- 90 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
b.tURLT
an appropriate building for its people
with the $46 million authorized. In ad-
dition, he pointed out that, while Mr.
Dulles had cited a construction cost rise
of 5.7% since the original authorization,
the DCI's possible request for an addition-
al $10 million was an increase of more
than 21% over the initial authorization.
As a result, the Senate Appropriations
Committee threw two serious hookers into
their approval of the $49 million appro-
priation. The first restriction was a
directive that CIA should plan to house
all of its headquarters personnel within
the limits of the $46 million authorized
for construction. The second was that
these funds should not be obligated or
spent until the Chairman of the National
Capital Planning Commission should certify
that written commitMents had been obtained
from the appropriate local authorities for
the financing and construction of roads,
sewage treatment plants, public transport
and other local facilities which the
Commission deemed necessary to service
the selected site. This latter restric-
tion probably reflected certain doubts
and questions which the Commission had
raised in their reports in first turning
down and subsequently approving CIA use
of the Langley site. 135/
The Legislative Counsel further noted that after
the "hookers"* were announced,
A study of the authority of the
National Capital Planning Commission
indicated to the General Counsel that
* The term "hookers" was quickly adopted and commonly
applied to the Congressional caveats by Agency personnel
who were closely involved in the negotiations with
Congress.
- 91 -
SECRET
A nnrnved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
awei
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEGRZT
they did not have the authority which
the Senate Appropriations Committee had
directed them to exercise. Furthermore,
involving them at such a point would
open a real can of worms. The problem
of the Committee directive, which would,
in effect, house all of CIA personnel
in a building constructed for $46 mil-
lion was also difficult. Mr. Dulles
had already surfaced to the Committee
the possibility that we would have to
retain the permanent buildings at 2430
E Street except for the building which
would be displaced by the new through-
way as well as cettain other permanent
construction buildings in which we were
presently housed. The only assurance
that we were able to make was that we
would vacate all of our temporary build-
ings. As a result, language somewhat
less restrictive to that drafted by the
Senate Appropriations Committee was
drafted and submitted to the Key members
of the Senate and House Appropriations
Committee who would be involved in the
compromise between the House and Senate
versions as conferees. These restric-
tions, which appeared in the Conference
Report, but not in the law itself, pro-
vided that the Agency make "every effort"
to construct a building which would ac-
commodate all its headquarters personnel
within the provided amount of $46 million
and also directed that these funds not be
spent in such a .way as to make it neces-
sary for the Congress to authorize ad-
ditional funds at a later date. The
conferees eliminated the requirement of
certification by the Chairman of the
National Capital Planning Commission but
directed that none of the funds be obligated
or spent until the DCI had obtained
written commitments from the appropriate
local authorities regarding the construc-
tion of roads, sewage.treatment.plants,
- 92 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
-
wool
111
wit
IOW
mni
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
UKE
public transportation and other local
facilities necessary to service the
site. With these caveats* in its
Conference Report, the Congress then
passed the Supplemental Appropriation
Bill, 1957, authorizing the appropria-
tion to CIA of $49 million which covered
the remaining sums for the building
construction and the extension of the
Parkway. The bill became law on 27
July 1956. On 8 November 1956, the
DDA [subsequently the DDS] sent a
memorandum to the DCI stating that the
necessary written commitments from the
local authorities and facilities had
been received and the DCI approved this
memorandum on 12 November, thus complying
with that particular caveat of the Congress. 112/
The official language in the report read:
The Committee directs that the Agency
make every effort to construct a build-
ing to accommodate all of its headquarters
personnel within the sum provided, and
directs that none of these funds be
spent in such a way as to make it
necessary for the Congress to authorize
additional funds at a later date.
The Committee further directs that
none of these funds be obligated or
spent until the Director of Central
Intelligence has obtained from the
appropriate local authorities written
commitments for the construction of
roads, sewage treatment plants, public
transport,-and of other local facilities
which are deemed necessary to service
the site selected. 136/
- 93
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
awl
ami
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
The first of the two conditions was a continuing
one and to this date (1972) has remained a sore point
for the Agency in resolving its space problems. Al-
though, there was considerable discussion regarding the
need for additional funding
powered delegation to
-- including a high-
office in mid-
action was taken in
January 1956* -- no further
* An excerpt from White's Diary Notes for 16 Janu-
ary. 1956 says:
Accompanied Mr. Dulles, General Cabell,
Mr. Amory, and Mr. Paul to the briefing
of Chairman Committee in the
Senate Office Building. We went into
the CIA budget, the number of personnel
we have, and our building situation.
Aside from this the briefin was largely
on the world situation. an-
flounced his intention to ave such a
meeting once a month, and as a result
of the continued interest in manpower
Mr. Dulles asked that we prepare a
presentation of about thirty minutes
in justification of our personnel
stren th. With regard to the building,
25)0 feels very strongly that we
s ou e ave whatever authorization and
appropriation are necessary to get all
our Washington people and activities
into one building. Mr. Dulles suggested
that he discuss this with Senator Hayden
and also stated that we would want to
touch base with the Executive Branch
before starting any action on legisla-
tion.
- 94 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
25X1
25X1
aid
sad
owl
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
connection with the Headquarters building.*
An interesting anecdote is provided by the
Curator of the Historical Intelligence Collection.
It seems that at one of Dulles's early Congressional
hearings,
Dulles had an artist's rendition of
what the front of the building would
look like. Presumably it had been
prepared in the Office of Harrison and
Abramovitz. One of the features of
that drawing was a large pool of water
in front of the main entrance which is
now occupied by the grass plot. A
member of Congress, in the course of
the hearing, asked Mr. Dulles with
some shock whether he really proposed
to have a swimming pool in front of the
building. Almost within a matter of
minutes, on .his return to Headquarters
the blue pool was painted over green
for grass. 139/
The Building Planning Staff, 1955-1957
In January 1955 Agency components had resub-
mitted their space requirement for a total of 1,646,000
* The man who was the Agency Legislative Counsel at
the time recalls that "One factor not raised in the
basic study was a legal problem that was given care-
ful consideration and was discussed in the course of
Congressional hearings. This was the .question as to
whether we would proceed by direct appropriation for
the building or work out a lease-purchase agreement.
It was finally concluded that the latter route pre-
sented many difficulties and additional costs, and
it was agreed to go forward by direct appropriation. 138/
- 95 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R00030006noni_n
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEU.K.Er
net square feet for
25X9
Agency employees. The
job of reducing these estimates fell to BPS, with
instructions to do further analysis and study of
the requirements to bring them inline with the
authorized available funds of $46 million. It ap-
peared to be the consensus of BPS, PBS, and the
steering committee that only under the most favorable
circumstances could CIA build a facility in excess
of 1,500,000 net square feet for less than the
authorization. 140/
The mission and objectives of BPS* were defined
as follows:
In the interest of effective Agency
planning for the proposed headquarters
building, it is necessary to determine
the requirements of every organizational
element in the Agency. It is considered
As the need for the construction of an Agency
Headquarters building became apparent in the early
19501s, itvms recognized that the Office of Security
should also play a significant role in the building
planning. In January 1952 White, then the DDA, told
Colonel Sheffield Edwards, then Assistant Deputy
Director for Inspection and Security, that a repre-
senative of the Office of Security should take an
active part in the planning from then on. The
establishment of the Building Planning Staff by the
DDA on 10 October 1955 formalized this arrangement.'
For complete details of significant contributions
made by the Office of Security, see Support Services
Historical Series, OS-3, Security Program of the CIA,
Physical Security,. Jun 72, pp. 239-259, S.
- 96 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
desirable that there be coordinated
?participation by representatives of
all components of the Agency. It is
necessary, however, that there be
centralized Agency control and guid-
ance by qualified architectural engi-
neers, space analysts, and security
and management officers to ensure
that these requirements conform to
' technical architectural and engineer-
ing principles and standards, as well
as principles of economy, security,
and sound management.
The mission and objectives of the liaison group
to BPS were defined as follows:
These officers have been charged with
the responsibility of supervising,
directing and coordinating the ?
development of requirements for all
types of space by the individual
organization elements within the
respective areas of their jurisdiction.
They are each authorized to represent
their respective Deputy Director in all
matters related to the development of
requirements and shall be the primary
liaison contact with the Building
Planning Staff. They shall ensure
that information required by the Build-
ing Planning Staff is developed and
submitted in accordance with the in-
structions and guidance provided by
the Building Planning Staff. 141/
Several members of BPS, including Riley, Mc-
Kinley, and
visited the NSA blinding plan-
ning group on frequent occasions to survey and
- 97 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
NEN
Nei
aid
25X1
25X1
4?111
nog
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEURET
coordinate certain requirements of mutual interest.*
One of the first assignments given the new BPS
Project Officer, Holloway, was a comparison study
of the plan followed by the Air Force for the con-
struction of the US Air Force Academy near Colorado
Springs, Colorado.. CIA was approaching the time
when a decision would have to be made, as to a design
and construction management agent, and some suggested
the need for a parallel to the "Air Academy Construction
25X1
* McKinley met and recruited Arch-
itect-Engineer, on such an occasion, had served
NSA as a military officer and as a staff employee
during the early planning of the new NSA Headquarters
Building at Fort Meade, Maryland, from September 1953
to 9 December 1955, when he joined CIA as a contract
employee to BPS/OL. After a short period of private
practice, became a staff architect on 24 April
1962 and a CIA career employee of the RECD/OL on 24
April 1967. He later assumed the leadership respon-
sibilities of the architect group after the resignation
of ! in 1959 even though he was at that time
only a WAE (When Actually Employed) employee workin
two or three days a week. 142/ Presentl (1973)
is Chief, Engineering Branch; RECD/OL.
the third architect, came to the Agency at age 25
as a Junior Officer Trainee (JOT) from Princeton
University in October 1957 after a short period of
military service with the US Navy. He resigned in
September 1960 to join the Commission ef Fine Arts,
Executive Office of the President, 143/ and since
1964 he has been the Executive Secretary to the ,
Fine Arts Commission.
- 98 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
25X1
25X1
owl
MIN
111011
410
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
0Ek...Ukr.,
Agency," which was established to administer the
planning and construction for the Air Force Chief
of Staff; but that Agency had its own architect-
engineering, construction, administrative, and comp-
troller divisions, which handled all liaison, con-
tracts, follow-up on construction, and the like.
The US Air Materiel Command was not involved in the
arrangement. The Air Academy Construction Agency
had a T/0 of 152 -- 132 civilians and 20 military
personnel -- to administer the services of the
architectural and constructional firms required for
the $106 million Academy project. 144/ This was a
staff far in excess of that available to BPS.*
The duties and responsibilities of the C/BPS/OL
were defined on 4 October 1955:
The Chief, Building Planning Staff,
shall be responsible for the admini-
stration and executive management of
* Manpower available to BPS was also considerably
below that available for the new $49.7 million State
Department Headquarters, which would soon occupy four
city blocks as an extension of ?the "New War Department
Building" at 320 21st Street, N.W. For this project,
GSA Administrator?Edmund:F. Mansure awarded a joint-
venture contract to three architectural firms on '
16 January 1956. 145/
- 99
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bkit-i.K.V,
all'matters related to planning for the
proposed Agency headquarters building.
He shall be the primary Agency planning
officer, and, as such, he shall provide
general guidance and direction to ensure
the development and maintenance of build-
ing requirements to meet established ar-
chitectural and engineering standards.
He shall also ensure that requirements
are developed in accordance with sound
principles of security, management, and
economy.
In the absence of the Director of Logistics,
was made directly responsible to the DDS. 146/
On 1 December 1955 CIA's Congressional relations
activities were
General Counsel
eral, and
transferred from the Office of the
to the
Office of the Inspector Gen-
succeeded Pforzheimer as
and
25X1
Legislative Counsel.
of the Office of the General Counsel were
active in the preparation of numerous studies and
legal briefs for BPS and the Agency steering committee
during this period. 147/*
* For "CIA Organizational Arrangement for the
Development of Definitive Plans for a Permanent
Headquarters Building," dated 4 October 1955, see
Appendix I.
- 100 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEU.K.V,
Selection of.the Architect and Construction Agent,
1955-1956
Because all early planning -- including the
compiling of cost and special requirement estimates
-- had been worked out through GSA and because the
Agency did not have the large construction organiza-
tion required to.carry out properly the detailed
:planning and contract supervision, it was finally
determined on 6 February 1956 that PBS/GSA would
act as agent for the CIA headquarters project. 148/
This decision did not come easily, for by September
1955 senior planners were still studying the relative
merits of having the Army Engineers, the PBS, or the
architectural firm (once it was chosen) act in this
supervisory capacity. 149/* As late as 17 February
* With reference to the question of whether the CIA
directly or the GSA (as agent for CIA) would supervise
construction, the Curator of the Historical Intelligence
Collection has noted.that
Section 401 of our basic building. author-
ization act of 1955 was carefully drafted
to authorize the DCI to provide for a
Headquarters installation rather than hav-
ing the usual authorization running to the
Administrator of GSA, and it was passed
in that form. This placed in the Director's
hands the control over the design and
construction of our facility. It was
(footnote continued on following page)
-- 101 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90:00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
6_tt.dic..t
1956 the DDS and the DCI were again considering the
advisability of selecting an outstanding retired US
Army Engineer to take overall charge of the construc-
tion project. Lieutenant General Samuel Sturgis,
Chief of Army Engineers, and four, others were being
considered.* Colonel Stanley J. Grogan, Assistant
to the Director, described the generals under study
as "professional types, aggressive, practical-minded,
somewhat hard-bitten engineers, who, I think would
get definite effective results in a minimum of
time." 151/ The DDS and the DCI were uncertain as
to the exact role such an officer should play with
relation to the Architect-Engineer and particularly
to PBS. On 17 February. 1956 the DDS noted that
"The right man in a smooth relationship could be a
real asset ... failure of such an individual to win
only after considerable debate and study
.of the pros and cons that it was finally
agreed to place this responsibility in
GSA hands. 150/
* In addition to Sturgis, Generals Da4ie1 Noce,
Stanley L. Scott, Cecil R. Moore, and Hugh J. Casey
were recommended to the DCI.
e?
- 102 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
am1
NMI
ari
owl
are
wad
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
complete acceptance ... could make him a definite
liability." 152/
Perhaps the reality of the "definite liability"
danger was of some concern to the DCI and the DDS
because of an unpleasant situation that had developed
in August 1955 involving Commissioner Peter A.
Strobel of PBS. At a meeting on 9 August 1955 between
the DCI and Edward Mansure, Administrator of GSA,
the following agreement had been reached on the
selection of architectural firms:
In asking the architects Harrison &
Abramovitz and F. R. King to act as
architects, with any other architects
? who might be associated with them, for
the new Headquarters for CIA, Mr. Dulles
requested,?and Mr. Mansure agreed, that
Mr. Harrison, with Mr. Dulles' approval,
have the final decision as to which plans
or designs would be submitted. In Mr.
Harrison's absence this responsibility
will be assumed on his behalf by Mr.
Abramovitz or Mr. King.
This agreement was acceptable to PBS/GSA as written;
it was dated 12 August 1955 and signed by P. A.
Strobel, Commissioner, PBS, 153/
On the same day that he signed tie agreement,
Strobel -- apparently in response to real or imagined
political pressures -- wrote a letter to the firm of
- 103 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
I
deYoung, Moscovitz, and Rosenberg informing them
that they had been chosen to be architectural
associates of Harrison & Abramovitz. This was
directly contrary to the arrangements that the
Agency believed had already received the full con-
currence of PBS/GSA, and on 18 August 1955 White
addressed the following blunt letter to Strobel:
Dear Mr. Strobel:
I have just received the copies
Of your letter of 12 August 1955 to
Mr. Moscovitz and Mr. Harrison which
I requested after you read them to me
on the telephone this morning. While
was aware that you had considered
the firm of deYoung, Moscovitz, and
Rosenberg as a possible affiliate to
Harrison & Abramovitz on the archi-
tectural-engineering contract for the
Central Intelligence Agency's building,
there is no foundation .whatsoever for
your statement in your letter to Mr.
Moscovitz that this firm had been
selected by the Central Intelligence
Agency.
At the various meetings on 9
August between the Director of Central
Intelligence, the Administrator of
General Services, Mr. Harrison, and
others, including yourself, it was
made quite clear that the question of
affiliation and the candidates therefor
would be considered but that no decision
would be made without further study and
discussion with Mr. Harrison. Therefore
any commitment or even discussion of
affiliation with any other firm is pre-
mature.
- 104 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
4211/
in0
AEI
war
mui
sal
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUICL
It is essential that the precise
situation be made quite clear to Mr.
Moscovitz in writing at the earliest
opportunity. This implies no criticism
whatsoever of the firm of deYoung,
Moscovitz, and Rosenberg, but would
apply equally to any other firm that
might have been put in this same posi-
tion. The magnitude and complexity of
this construction project require the
most careful consideration by all con-
cerned in the initial steps.'
As you know, we hope to work out
a mutually satisfactory arrangement
with the General Services Administration
for carrying out this project, but
unless and .until our respective roles
are clearly delineated and agreed upon,
I must request that all actions of any
nature whatever by the General Services
Administration with regard to this
project be concurred in fully and in
writing by the Central Intelligence
Agency in advance.
This letter, in fact, became the basis for the formal
agreement executed between Dulles and Mansure, repre-
senting GSA, on 6 February 1956. 154/
* Walter Pforzheimer recalls that "Rarely was Director
Dulles so angry as when he was apprised of Strobel's
unauthorized designation of a co-architect for the
building. Strobel's conflicts in this and on other
occasions were brought out at Congressional hearings
(U.S. Congress, House, Committee of the Judiciary.
Antitrust Subcommittee Hearings, Activtties of Peter
Strobel, 1955). They are also discussed in a recent
book entitled Conflict of Interest in the Eisenhower
Administration by David A. Frier. (Ames, Iowa: Iowa
University Pres, 1969, pp. 91-102 and, in particular,
p. 99)." 155/
- 105 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUK.t:;1.
At this point it is necessary to review in
some detail the circumstances and events leading
up to White's letter to Commissioner Strobel. At
the request of Sherman Adams, the Assistant to
President Eisenhower, Major General John.S. Bragdon*
and Mansure called on the DCI in his office on
21 April 1955 to discuss a broad range of Government
construction policies. One subject was the removal
of temporary buildings, and the other was the possi-
bility of meeting CIA's needs by building a small
headquarters in the Washington area and a large
"workshop" well away from the city. 156/ At this
meeting Bragdon and Mansure strongly urged Dulles
to select an architect at an early date. This advice
was very much to the point for the potential candi-
dates were beginning to put out feelers. In the
early summer of 1955, the DDS recorded that
Eddie Mathews of' Skidmore, Owings,
and Merrill was in for about an hour
* Bragdon was in the class of 1915 at West Point
(the President's class). He had an impressive record
with the Army Engineers; and under President Eisen-
hower he was appointed Special Assistant to the
President, specifically as an advisor on construc-
tion.
- 106 -
SECRET -
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
MAW
? rad
owl
mid
MOW
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUKEI:
to discuss our building with us. He
would like very much to have us select
his company to do the architectural
work. In view of the admonition which
we received on the Hill from Congressman
Mahon and Senator Stennis. I doubt if
this would be a wise idea. They are
pretty unhappy about what Skidmore,
Owings, and Merrill have done to the
Air Force Academy. 157/
In July. 1955, during a meeting between PBS and
the Agency, the relationships between the DDS and
Strobel first came to some strain over the matter
of an architect. Again the entries in the White
diaries provide the details of what would continue
to be an off-again-on-again relationship with GSA/PBS
throughout the construction activity. White recorded:
Jim Garrison, and I
met with Pete Strobel, Fred Poorman, and
'Len Hunter of the Public Buildings Serv-
ice to discuss architectural services.
After a good half hour of talking about
inconsequential matters, Pete finally
got to the point of the meeting by
saying that now that we were in a posi-
tion to select an architect the Public
Buildings Service considered such a
selection to be its prerogative. This
? led to a long and very frank discussion
during which I told Pete that I disagreed
very strongly with him, that we did not
consider this to be a PBS prerogQ.tive,
and that we expected to participate
fully in the selection of an architect,
as well as on other aspects of this
building. I emphasized to him that Mr.
Dulles had given the Congress his personal
107--
?
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
on the Memorandum of Understanding which
I think is necessary in any case.* 159/
PBS followed through with a list of potential
architects, and the DCI wrote Mansure on 3 August
1955:
I reviewed the list of architectural
firms to which the Public Buildings
Service mailed questionnaires and my
representatives have examined the re-
sponses of some 57 of these firms which
have been returned to date. Of these,
it appears that Harrison and Abramovitz
is at this time in a particularly good
position to undertake this work and I
am personally very much aware of their
outstanding reputation. I have personally
known Mr. Wallace K. Harrison for many
years and believe that he, as well as his
partner, are particularly qualified to
deal with certain of the specialized
problems involved in a building for CIA.
Subject to negotiation of a satisfactory
contract, I should like to select this
firm to perform the architectural and
engineering services for their construc-
tion. I trust that this selection will
be agreeable to you as I desire to pro-
ceed immediately with the necessary
preliminary negotiations. 160/
The DDS and Dulles had met briefly with Harrison
on the same day, 3 August 1955. Highlights of that
* This meticulous attention to detailed record keeping
was characteristic of White throughout his tenure as
deputy and then chief of the Agency's Support Directorate.
In fact, he continued his daily diaries as Executive
Director-Comptroller.
- 109 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEGitta.
meeting in New York were as follows: Harrison stated
that he would be delighted to undertake the project
but suggested that he would like to bring some of
his associates down to Washington to discuss the
project in more detail. Harrison said that he under?
-
stood thoroughly the possibility that problems with
GSA could not be worked out satisfactorily and that
he was, not out soliciting new business. The DCI was
leaving for Europe on 13 August 1955, so the, next
meeting was arranged for 9 August in the DCI's Wash-
ington office. The DDS then agreed to assemble all
pertinent data for Harrison's party to scan before
the meeting so that the nature of the problem would
be understood. 161/
The DCI sent a plane to bring Harrison to
Washington as scheduled, and included in the group
'were James Dawson of Harrison and Abramovitz Frederick
King of Wyeth and King, Associated Architect, and -
Michael Rapuano. CIA personnel participating were
White, Lloyd, Garrison,
White later noted in his diary that
and Houston.
The briefing was designed to familiarize
Mr. Harrison's party with the background
of our authorization,'appropriation, site
- 110 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
- ow,
- Ari
study, etc., and to discuss the CIA/GSA/
architect relationship. In this regard
Mr. Dulles made it clear to Mr. Harrison
that we would defer to his judgment in
the selection of any associate architect
as well as the manner in which he would
be associated. Mr. Harrison stated that
through his long years of experience in
working with other people in many projects,
but particularly Rockefeller Center and
the United Nations Building, he had become
firmly convinced that it was necessary to
have one person authorized to make final
decisions with regard to design. He in-
dicated very nicely that while he, person-
ally, did not necessarily wish to have
this authority he thought that it should
?mg be placed in one person, either himself,
Mr. Abramovitz,-or possibly Mr. King.
He said that he would want to make this
...? quite clear in our subsequent discussions
with GSA. Mr. Dulles emphasized his desire
to have Mr. Harrison make and be respon-
.0 sible for all such decisions and stated
that he would's? advise GSA representatives.
asp
building problem was discussed only in broad gen-
eralities. After lunch, Dulles, White, Harrison,
King Mansure, and Strobel adjourned to Dulles'
office. The DCI opened this discussion by saying
The memorandum for the record that covered the
entire meeting provided more details. The group
that met in the DCI s office was joined for lunch
by Mansure; Strobel; Frederick S. Poorman, Deputy
Commissioner of PBS; and Leonard L. Hunter, Super-
vising Architect for PBS. During the luncheon the
-.111 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
to Mansure, in substance, that CIA representatives
had been working together on this project for some
time but the responsibility for the building and
the funds involved therewith rested clearly with
the DCI. He stated that he had persuaded Harrison
to be the architect on this project and that he
wanted architectural and other services arranged in
a way that would be entirely satisfactory to him.
Harrison then repeated his earlier statements
to this group. He emphasized that he was not con-
cerned about the fee or who got paid how much, but
that he felt very strongly that some one person must
be responsible for making decisions, particularly
with regard to design, in the event that contro-
versies arose. He also said that he would want the
relationship of any associate architect very clearly
spelled out prior to such associatiOn in order to
avoid misunderstandings at a later date. Dulles
emphasized that he wanted it definitely understood
that Harrison would be the "boss" when these deciSions
were made.
Strobel suggested that with Harrison's out-
standing reputation there would certainly be no
- 112 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEU,KEI:
question that his word would be the final one in the
event of a controversy. Dulles pressed this point,
however, by stating that he wanted to make sure that
it was understood and that he would like to put it
in writing. Strobel protested mildly the subordina-
tion of the associate architect and explained that
GSA normally let separate contracts to the principal
and associate architects. After some discussion,
however, it was decided and agreed that the associa-
tion, if any, would be worked out in accordance with
Harrison's desires. It was further agreed that
after visiting the Langley and Winkler properties
further discussions would take place.
Mansure then went into quite a discourse about
the various political pressures that were brought to
bear on him in the selection of architects. While
reiterating that he had never succumbed to the pres-
sures of the National Republican Committee, he stated
that he and his people certainly had to be on the
lookout to handle them carefully; and he went into
great detail, most confidentially, about pressures
being put upon him by Senator Dirksen and many others.
There was no question but that politics wouldin
- 113 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
??4
- 4?11
?0111
owls
mid
no one asked their politics, that it was absolutely
essential that this Agency be kept completely free
from political influence and pressure, and that he
wanted politics to have nothing to do with the con-
struction of a new CIA building. The meeting ended
with friendly agreement that the entire procedure
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEU.K.t.;
his mind, play a part in the selection of an architect,
although he put it on the basis of trying to spread
the workload around as much as possible and to make
sure that no one firm would get all the plums. He
also agreed, however, that the system that Harrison
desired could be worked out.
Following Mansure's discourse, Dulles told him
that he knew that he, Mansure, was well aware of
his, Dulles's, long Republican record and background;
but he stated that when he took the job as DCI he
determined to keep his official business and his
politics separate. The DCI said that he had lived
up to this religiously, had always been backed by
the President, and was sure that the President would
support him in this policy. He emphasized that
when individuals came to the Agency for employment
-114-
-
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
????11
iN
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECREE
could be worked out to the satisfaction of both
Harrison and Dulles.*
The party then went to inspect the Langley
and Winkler properties. It was obvious that every-
one, including the GSA representative, favored the
Langley property, Harrison thought that it was a
beautiful site for a building, one of which the
Agency could be proud. He said that the Winkler
property would have been just an office building
on a parking lot, and he wanted to proceed with the.
Langley site without further delay. 163/
The group broke up after the inspection trip,
and it seemed -- to the DCI, the DDS, and Harrison,
at least -- that the meeting had produced definite
* Mansure raised the subject of political pressures
in a subsequent meeting shortly after the one in
question. The DDS reported: "Mr. Mansure ... pursued
about the same line that he did in discussing this
matter with Mr. Dulles, Mr. Harrison, and others
when we all met a couple of months ago. Specifically,
he said he was under terrific pressure from both the
Republican National Committee and the Government
Operations Committee to take charge of construction
such as ours and that while his select4on of an
architect would not be a political choice it certainly
would be a firm which the National Committee approved
of. ... Mr. Mansure said that he. didn't care whether
or not GSA did the building, but that if they did not
then he wanted to be taken off the hook both legally
and politically." 162/
- 115 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bt,t,),KL I
agreements on working principles, primarily the
agreement that there would be absolutely no politics
applied to the selection of associate architects
and that final authority for actual selection of
associates rested with the DCI. Three days after
the meeting, Strobel wrote his letter to Moscovitz --
the 12 August letter that generated White's stormy
reply of 18 August.
About a year later, at the end of the summer
of 1956, it appeared that most major problems had
been dealt with -- or at least headed in the right
direction. A last-ditch attempt by the NCPC to
block the Langley site was reported by the DDS:
Attended a meeting of a committee
appointed by the National Capital Plan-
ning Commission to respond to Senator
Chavez' request for sites in the District
of Columbia on which it might be suitable
to construct our new building. As usual,
Jack Nolen had drafted the paper in a
vein which would make it appear fairly
simple for us to locate in the District.
The committee -- composed of Mr. Remon,
Vice-Chairman of the Planning Commission,
Mr. Hunter of the Public Buildings Serv-
ice, Colonel Carlson of the Army Engineers,
and Colonel Hunter of the Engineer. Commis-
sioner's office for the District ... was
quite reasonable, however, and when I
pointed out that it would cost $10,000,000
more to buy land and another $10,000,000
to take care of the structural changes
- 116 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
lila
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
and ornamental embellishments they agreed
to put this in their report. They also
agreed to put in their report that CIA
had special requirements, particularly
of a security nature, which the committee
was unable to evaluate. Of several sites,
including our present location, the National
Training School for Boys, Southwest Wash-
ington, the Bureau of Standards, and Soldiers'
Home, it was concluded generally that the
National Training School for Boys and our
present location were the most favorable.
I do not believe that anything will come
of this report, and, in fact, it may get
back to Senator Chavez after our Bill has
already been marked up by Senator Hayden's
Committee, I think we are far enough
ahead of them in this instance that it is
not likely, to cause trouble. 164/
The effort came to naught, as White predicted,
and the Langley site held firm;* the construction-
agent agreement had been executied; as of 5 July
1956 the architect-engineering firm of Harrison and
Abramovitz was under contract, with a fee set at
$1,975,150**,; and the Congress was about to
mad * A deed of cession was executed by the Govenor and
Attorney General of Virginia for that state and by
the DCI (Dulles) for the US Government. This resulted
from a joint effort of Garrison, then the Director of
Logistics; ; and the General Counsel, Houston.
It ensured the orderly cooperation of Agency authori-
ties with the Virginia state and count governments
with respect to protection and administration of the
Headquarters property at Langley.
** The contract was executed by the new PBS Commis-
sioner, F. Morgan McConihe.
25X1
- 117 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
1(t-1'
appropriate $49 million, which constituted the balance
of the funds authorized.* The main provisions of the
construction agreement were that architectural-engi-
neering work would be performed by Harrison and
Abramovitz; all sketches, plans, estimates, and
specifications would be approved by both PBS and
CIA; and PBS would execute all construction contracts
subject to prior approval by CIA. 165/
An interesting and troublesome irritant in the
selection of the, architectural and engineering firm
for the new building was provided by the continued
pressure from various Congressmen to promote favorite
firms as either principal or associated contractors.
Representative Broyhill, who has already been men-
tioned as attempting to look out for his northern
Virginia constituents,
made a special plea that a Northern
Virginia architect be associated with
the firm of Harrison & Ambramovitz in
connection with the construction of our
proposed new headquarters building and
requested specifically that such an
associate architect be the firm of
Willgoos & Chase. 166/
* Public Law 814, 84th Congress, 27 July 1956.
- 118 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Mei
- Arl
mit
mod
.w
On I March 1956 Mr. Dulles advised
? me that he had just received a tele-
phone call from Senator Styles Bridges
[New Hampshire] with regard to
- 119 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bht,i1(..ti
Reporting on the meeting with Broyhill and
Willpos, the DDS noted that
I stated that we were sympathetic to
the idea of having a "local" architect
associated with Harrison & Abramovitz
but that no decision in this regard,
even a preliminary decision, had been
reached... .
Congressman Broyhill and Mr. Willgoos
indicated that they would like to go
back to the General Services Administra-
tion and I agreed to advise the Congress-
man when we had been in touch with Mr.
Floete, the new Administrator of General
Services. (I believe that he then plans
to try to see Mr. Floete on behalf of
Willgoos &.Chase.)
I contacted Congressman Broyhill by
telephone on 20 February [1956] and
advised him that Mr. Dulles had talked
with Mr. Floete. He appreciated this
advice and said that he would proceed
to make an appointment to see Mr.
Floete. 167/
Shortly after this episode the DDS prepared
another memorandum for the record which not only
noted some Senatorial interest in the architectural-
engineering contracts but also some apparent collabor-
ation with Representative Broyhill on the matter.
White's memorandum read as follows:
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bk4,41i.r.,
architectural services in connection with
our proposed new building (the Senator
has telephoned on at least two previous
occasions in support of Williams, Coile
& Blanchard), at which time the Senator
had stated that it was his understanding
that interested congressmen (presumably
Republicans who are interested in this
matter) would be satisfied to have the
firm of Williams, Coile & Blanchard par-
ticipate in the architectural and engi-
neering aspects of our building project
provided the firm of Wingoos & Chase
was also associated in some way.
I explained to Mr. Dulles that I had
not discussed this matter. with anyone
except Congressman Broyhill, who had
brought Mr. Willgoos to see me some-
time ago, and emphasized that I had
not brought the matter to the attention
of Senators Byrd or Robertson. I also
told him that we had done nothing with
the General Services Administration
inasmuch as he had requested that we
not proceed until Mr. Floete was in
office and we had had a chance to talk
With him.* 168/
At the time the DCI appeared before the Senate
Appropriations Committee on 11 July 1956, he made
another plea -- a concerted effort to have the pre-
viously denied funds restored:
* Emphasis added. An inquiry had also come from the
office of Senator Gordon Allott (Coloriado) in the
winter of 1956 concerning the "status of our archi-
tectural arrangements for the new building," but it
is not known if there was any follow-up to this inquiry
or if any specific firm was recommended by the Senator. 169/
- 120 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001:0
rel
JEW
mai
mor
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUI-Ct.
I hope you will concur in my view that
it would be false economy not to con-
struct a building adequate to house all
of our people. .The basic facilities
such as heating, air-conditioning, ele-
vators, etc., are being designed to
service a building which would accommodate
all of our employees. In January when
our final plans will be nearing, comple-
tion, in the judgment of the Congress,
it seems wise to request that our
enabling legislation be amended in order
to provide for .a building costing approx-
imately $56 million, I would propose to
make such a request along with a request
for the necessary appropriation (approx-
imately $10 million) with which to carry
out the construction.
As noted earlier,* however, Congress denied an
increase in additional funds; and in appropriating
the $49 million it placed the two caveats in Senate
Report No. 2580, Chapter III of the Supplemental
Appropriations Bill of 1957. By the fall of 1956
the DDS was able to write to the DCI:
You will recall that in appropri-
ating the balance of the funds for the
building, the Congress laid down two
conditions which are contained in the
.Conference Report. ...
The first of these conditions (that
an attempt be made to house all HQ
personnel in the new building anA that
* See pp. 90-93.
- 121 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
1,m111
?mi
ml
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEU.K.k,
no additional appropriation be requested]
is of a continuing nature. In satisfac-
tion of the second, written commitments
have been obtained from the appropriate
local authorities (and private utilities)
[to provide all necessary public services
and Utilities to the building] ? 000
In my opinion and that of the General
Counsel, the written commitments obtained
satisfy the condition[s] laid down by the
Congress. It is recommended that you
approve this conclusion, thereby authoriz-
ing the obligation and expenditure of the
appropriated funds, or their transfer to
other Government agencies as may be
necessary. 170/
Approval was granted on 12 November 1956, 171/ and
on 29 January 1957 the DDS forwarded a memorandum
to the Director of Logistics:
1. The attached paper was presented
orally by me and discussed at the Deputies'
Meeting on 28 January 1957. The Director
approved of the recommendations contained
in subparagraphs a. and b. of paragraph 6.
His decision with regard to the recommenda-
ma tion contained in subparagraph c. thereof
i
must await the outcome of his discussions
with certain members of the Congress.
However, on the assumption that we will
??? not seek an additional authorization and
appropriations at this time he has re-
quested that letters be drafted to the
President and the Chairman of the House
and Senate Armed Services and Appropria-
tions Committees advising them of our
situation and plan of procedure. In
this connection I have requested the
Comptroller to submit these to me as
soon as possible.
YIP
- 122 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
mid
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
2. Regardless of whether we seek an
additional authorization and appropria-
tion at this time or at some later date
we definitely will proceed with our present
plan for a $46,000,000 building. If an
additional authorization and funds are
made available at a subsequent time we
.will augment our building either by
adding a wing or by 'constructing a
separate building at the same location.* 172/
* An additional problem of construction funds was
under consideration about this same time, and an
extract from White's Diary Notes indicates an aware-
ness of the need to insure that there would be no
interference with the Headquarters construction
appropriation. Speaking of a meeting of the Project
Review Committee, the then DDS recorded:
? The Records Center Project was con-
curred in by everyone except Bob Amory
[then the DDI] who nonconcurred. It
is his belief that he can slow down
the flow of documents to the Center for
a while and that very shortly his Mini-
card system will be able to solve the
whole problem without additional con-
struction. It was the opinion of the
remaining members of the Committee
that the Minicard would not' develop
in sufficient time. (In this connection,
I must advise to look into
the Minicard problem carefully and be
prepared to respond when the Director
makes an inquiry, which he almost
certainly will.) It was, of course,
understood by everyone that we would
touch 'base with the Bureau of the Budget
prior to undertaking this construction
and that it would be handled in such a
way that it would not jeopardize our
new building. [Emphasis added.] 173/
- 123 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRE'i'
A copy of the memorandum was also sent to the
Inspector General, among other senior officials. The
response from the IG, then Lyman Kirkpatrick, amounted
to an almost personal attack on the integrity of the
DDS; and it implied that the DCI was being advised
to conceal from Congress the fact that not all of the
personnel in the Headquarters area could be housed
in the new building,* 174/ In fact, however, it had
been made abundantly clear to the Congress, to the
BOB, and to other interested parties that unless the
Agency were given an increased appropriation this
would be the result. In any event, the DDS was taken
aback, and he recorded that
I showed Mr. Dulles the memorandum
that I had received from Lyman Kirkpatrick
dated 4 February 1957, subject; "Plan-
ning for the Proposed New Headquarters
Building," and told him that .I was not
concerned about it myself, but that in-
asmuch as Mr. Kirkpatrick was his
* A copy of the IG's memorandum is attached as
Appendix J. The subject of the relationship of the
IG to other Agency components is a history in itself,
but it is apparent in the research materials on the
Headquarters construction that the pulling and hauling
between the DDS and the IG was rather severe.
- 124 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
IMO
awl
MOO
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECKEt
Inspector General I thought he ought to
be aware of its content. He read the
memorandum, was obviously not pleased
with it, and told me to forget it and
proceed in accordance with our earlier
discussions. He did say that he had no
objection to having a Steering Committee
Meeting on this matter but that in all
honesty he saw no purpose in doing so.
agreed and we let it go at that. 175/
- 125 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bht...;.K.V.,
Chapter III
The Design and Construction Stage
Topographic surveys of the Langley site were
prepared during the summer of 1956 by the firm of
Harry Otis Wright, engineers, of Fairfax, Virginia.
Soil tests, including seven borings, were completed
during August 1956 by the Raymond Concrete Pile
Company of Washington, and these reports were sub-
mitted to the construction agent, GSA, and the
architects, Harrison and Abramovitz (H&A).* 177/ ?
As of.31 December 1956 the Agency's space-
occupancy position for the departmental area was
1,486,450 net square feet occupied at more than 40
locations. 178/ BPS was again charged with the task
of recommending the best method of reducing Agency
* Test boring proceeded even though the basic site
of 131.563 acres at Langley was not officially trans-
ferred to CIA until 15 March 1957, and all agreements
were accepted and signed on 5 April 1957. See
Appendix K for site acquisition data and site loca-
tion.
- 126 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Nami
mai
25X1
mi0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
ShUttr,
headquarters requirements when compiling the next
"Space Directive."*
The Design of the Superstructure, 1956-1958
Members of BPS visited the offices of the
architect-engineer in New York at frequent intervals
during the design stage of the planning. On one
such visit
Anderson, and Ambrose reviewed?
some 15 to 20 schematic sketches related to site
grade and other site conditions. The necessity for
the preliminary site investigation to establish sub-
surface conditions was apparent. BPS had arranged
for a contract whereby from seven to ten auger bor-
ings were made in designated locations. Harrison
insisted that the diagrammatic drawings for this
phase be done in his New York office because he and
ami Abramovitz were necessarily very much involved.
In addition to the site planning, Harrison
further indicated that H&A must know what was going
riEN
rad
=pi
* Whether or not the BPS "best" methocl would be
acceptable seems doubtful. The DDS reported that
in a Deputies' meeting regarding possible adjustments
to get more square footage, "... the Director indi--
cated that he didn't want to go 'all out' on auster-
ity." 179/
? 127 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R00030006000i_n
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
into every space in the building. This led to a
further briefing regarding relationships of Agency
components and space characteristic requirements, and
in May 1956 BSA had in their office coded organiza-
tional charts, cluster diagrams, and the coded
Space Directive -- components to office level. It
appeared that weekly meetings, either in New York
or Washington, with PBS, H&A, and BPS representatives
would be necessary to effect expeditious completion
of the diagrammatic drawings. 180/
On 15 November 1956 the Acting Commissioner
of PBS wrote to the DCI outlining the various meetings
and special studies completed to date, all of which
covered the general scheme to be followed. H&A had
submitted a tentative schedule of work, which PBS
felt was realistic, considering the scope of the
design project. The schedule was as followsf
(1) .Diagrammatic drawings: to
be submitted 7 December
1956
(2) Tentative drawings: to be
submitted 30 January 1957
(3) Working drawings: to be sub-
mitted for review 26 August
1957
- 128 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
ossi
GNI
IMO
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
OZt..A.K.r.?? 1
(4) Corrected final drawings and
specifications: to be sub-
mitted 4 October 1957
? (5) Advertise for bids: 18 Oct-
ober 1957
(6) Open bids: 29 November 1957
(7) Award contract: 4 December
1957 181/
It then became necessary to expedite security clear-
ances through SECRET for more than 40 persons of the
New York firms of H&A, Wyeth and King, Clarke and
Rapuano, Syska and Hennessy, and Edwards and Hjorth. 182/
In the early sketches done before the dia-
grammatic drawings, the proposed building consisted
of irregular and rectangular block-type wings and a
cafeteria. Two of the wings contained a basement,
a ground floor, and six stories; the other wings, a
ground floor, and six stories. The cafeteria had a
ground floor and.one story, and the auditorium had
one story. Each wing had a mechanical penthouse.
The construction was to be concrete with spread
footings, and the exterior was to be finished in
face brick and concrete with stone trim at the main
entrance only. Windows were to be projected steel '
? - 129 -
..? SECRET?
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECIth".1:
sash with DSA glass* and no screens. Ceilings in
the proposed building were to be suspended acoustic
plaster. The corridors were to have fixed partitions
with concrete masonry units. Interior finish called
for plaster on masonry units and painted masonry units
The new building was also to have all-weather air
conditioning, surface-mounted fluorescent lighting
rod fixtures, and asphalt tile floors. Movable parti-
moi
am.
ONO
am.
wool
tisara
tions were to be constructed of wire stud with gypsum
lath and plaster. Early plans for laboratory areas
did not include furniture or equipment.
The total gross area of the proposed building,
exclusive of the boiler plant, was 1,845,000 square
feet, and the total volume was approximately 24.2
million cubic feet. The net area was allocated as
follows:
Thousand
Square Feet
Agency space
1,135
Cafeteria
55
Custodial, etc.
45
'TOTAL
1,235
* Double-strength "A" quality glass.
- 130 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
MIA
ea/
MOP
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
siuiuci
The following breakdown of the estimated costs
for the proposed building 183/ was furnished in late
1956:
Building Construc-
tion, including air
conditioning $34,405,000
Elevators and Esca-
lators 1,500,000
$35,905,000
Boiler and air-
conditioning plant 1,800,000
Mechanical distribution . 200,000
Outside utilities, water
tower & fire lines 255,000
Special Requirements
(see below) 1,285,000
Emergency Generators 500,000
Roads, Parking &
Site Development 1,635,000
Reservations 228,000
Contingencies 1,692,000
General Expenses:
Drawings and Speci-
fications 2,040,000
Supervision 360,000
Office Expense 100,000
2,500,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $46,000,000
The Special Requirements indicated above were roughly
defined as follows:
Cellular Floor System, in part
Pneumatic Tube Systems
Nitrate Film Storage
ADT Alarm Systems
Auditorium
Laboratory Space
- 131 -
SECRET
$ 150,000
350,000
35,000
200,000
150,000
200,000
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
"MI
mud
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bht4'(...1 J.
Radio and Microwave Antenna
Incinerators and Chutes (security)
Private Elevator
50,000
105,000
45,000
$ 1,285,000
George Johnston, Thaddeus Crapster, and Daniel
Sella of the Architect's office met with PBS on 11 Feb-
ruary 1957 to review and discuss the cost estimates
for the building. It was agreed that a building of
1,235,000 net square feet, according to the diagrammatic
sketches of 24 January 1957, could not be constructed
within the limits of the appropriated funds. The
DCI wanted to proceed with the planning for the
maximum building possible within the approved funds.
He recognized that the requirements were such that
a further reduction of the Agency space would
0.1 seriously impair the basic functional unity. If
some design features were changed or eliminated,
however, the necessary reduction could be less ex-
tensive than would have been required if all of the
proposed design features were retained.
The planners therefore suggested that any
features that might be more costly thar.1 normal should
be re-evaluated with a view toward more economical
design -- for example, the rounded corners of the
.40
AIN
?111111
- 132. -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bk,U440 I
ground and first floor walls; the cantilever at the
first and third floor slabs; and the precast concrete
frames for windows on the third, fourth, fifth, and
sixth floors.*. In addition it was agreed that revised
estimates should be prepared showing several alternative
considerations, including .the possible elimination
of the auditorium and the passage from the main
building to the bus loading area, change of the
cafeteria design, decrease of the seventh floor set-
back, a different type of air convector unit under
the windows, and the elimination of several passenger
elevators.
.14 The planners were generally agreed that it
would be more desirable to construct a building based
upon the sketches, and they considered it extremely
regrettable that the development of the project was
so severely restricted by the availability of funds;
but some of the economy suggestions were incorporated
* The Agency planners were also under some pressure
from GSA to cut costs. In late December 1956 the
Director of Logistics, James Garrison, informed the
DDS that GSA was dissatisfied with the tentative
drawings prepared by H&A because "they feel the
exterior is too plush." 184/
-, 133 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
in the next submission of diagrammatic sketches, and
even with these modifications the building could
remain one of which the architect could be proud. 185/
The Agency had the first of two appearances
before the Fine Arts Commission (FAC) on 24 January
1957.* Before the first presentation, Crapster,
H&A's Project Architect, spent three or four days
on several occasions with BPS and studied the func-
tional relationships of the major components of the
Agency. A site model with two to five stories and
block-type wings of varying widths was discussed.
The "park-like" character -- a "campus-type" setting'
with several connected buildings in close proximity.
dui
-- was considered desirable and acceptable, but it
required more expensive construction.** A statement
NMI
um*
* Among the engineer-architects engaged in design
and planning of the Headquarters Building, the
following had been, or were to become, members of ,
the Fine Arts Commission during the dates indicated:
Gilmore D. Clarke (1932-50), Wallace K. Harrison
*to (1955-59); and Michael Rapuano (1958-62). Clarke
served as Chairman of the FAC from'1937.to 1950.
** See Appendix P, Figure 10, for a picture of the
"Block-type buildings" on an early site model of
the Langley tract.
- 134 -
? SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
from the Commission of Fine Arts Seventeenth Report
to the President follows:
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
Presenting the preliminary plans
and drawings for the proposed Central
Intelligence Agency headquarters build-
ing near Langley, Virginia, Mr. Max
Abramovitz of Harrison,& Abramovitz,
architects, stated that the security
required by the Agency prompted the
architects to design a large compact
building to be erected in the center
of a large wooded area. Having dis-
cussed the features of the plan and
site, the members of the Commission,
on 24 January 1957, gave their general
approval of them. An intention to
use sculpture in relation to archi-
tecture was noted with the hope that
this feature would be carried to com-
pletion.
After viewing a model of the pro-
posed building and discussing the design
of the architectural features presented
at the 19 December 1957 meeting, the
members approved the design as submitted.* 186/
* The foregoing narrative probably has oversimplified
the difficulties which developed between Harrison and
Abramovitz and the PBS when the building authorization
was limited to $46 million rather than $56 million. At
best the position of the DDS was difficult, as he led
negotiations designed to reduce the overall costs but
yet retain as many of. the desirable engineering features
as possible. From January 1957 through June of 1957
there was a heavy volume of.correspondence and meetings
among H&A, GSA/PBS, and Agency representatives., One
effect of the design changes was to delay the prepara-
tion of working drawings by H&A.and, automatically, the
bids for construction contracts. 187/ The bids, in fact,
were opened 13 months later than had been tentatively
,planned -- on 18 December 1958 rather than in November
1957. 188/
- 135 -
SECRET
Aooroved For Release 2009/01/16 CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
azA
1=1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bEtj.K.V.,
As another of the minor irritants related to
the efforts on the new building the National Capital
Planning Commission tried to interject itself into
the picture again in mid-1956 when it suggested that
it would like to review the new building plans. The
DDS, as usual, was under the gun to respond to the
NCPC; and as the following comments show, he took a
..? dim view of any such NCPC review:
ami
mi0
25X1
NNW
25X1
I told that I did not
care to have Mr. Nolen (Director of the
NCPC] review the plans, but assumed that
we would have to show them to the Commis-
sion sooner or later. (I don't think
that we are ready yet, and we should not
make our presentation in a manner which
would indicate that we are asking for
the Commission's approval.) 189/
Talked to Larry Houston about the
interest of the National Capital Plan-
ning Commission in reviewing the plans
for our new building. It is his opinion
that legally we are not required to go
back to the Commission at this time.
We agreed that we would drag our feet.
on this as much as possible since I
believe strongly that nothing except
possible adverse publicity would 'come
out of such a presentation. 190/
I talked to about
Jack Nolen's suggestion that we come
before the National Capital Planning
Commission and told him that I had no
intention of taking the initiative in
this matter and wished to avoid going
? 136 ?
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
0.M.A.K.Z 1
before the Commission as long as possible.
I feel that we should take the line that
we have not gone into successive stages
of planning which would affect the develop-
ment of the National Capital, and, there-
fore, there is no reason for us to go
back to the Commission at this time. How-
ever, if the Commission still wants us to
come, then it should address a letter to
us on the subject. 191/
On 22 March 1957 the steering committee approved
"Headquarters Building Space Directive D" dated 12
March 1957. This 101-page document listed in detail
the space requirements for each office, division,
and staff-level component for a total of 1,010 050
net square feet. A. similar report listed the com-
ponent elements to be housed,:elsewhere in the metro-
politan area for a total of 435,200 net square feet.
"Space Directive D" became the planning instrument
to be used by H&A for the submission of working
drawings. 192/
For many months. the component liaison officers
to BPS, with the assistance of other staff members,
were preparing planning papers and staff studies to
determine the desirability and priority of certain
special requirements. Several of these special
studies were Cafeteria Concession
-137 -
of BPS);
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
rod
?11111
awl
25X1
25X1
25X1
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUICET
Auditorium, Hall of Honor, Conference Equipment, and
of OTR); Building Supply
Services C. of OL); Printing and
; Sec-
Exhibit Hall* (
Graphics Reproduction Services (
urity and Security Definitions, Restricted Areas,
Secure Areas, Vaults (
Post Office, Drug Store, Gas Station,
and Dry Cleaning Facilities (
Telephone Facilities (
Services
25X1 Services
; Banks,
Barber Shop,
of BPS); Secure
of RECD); Communications Equipment and
??? 25)0 Equipment (
mei
owl
of BPS); Medical Equipment and
of BPS); and Library and Mail Handling
Liaison
Officers of BPS). The steering committee was required
* With. reference to an Exhibit Hall, the curator of
the Historical Intelligence Collection reported:
The auditorium was also supposed to be
a hall of honor and exhibit area. Un-
fortunately, the lack of funds did not
permit this and only the bare auditorium
was built. At one point, the DDCI, Gen-
eral Cabell, discussed .with Mr. Pforzheimer
the need for a special "trophy rpom" in
which could be placed honors and awards
which the Agency and its individual em-
ployees had received from various govern-
ments and the like as well as being
sufficiently secure to show various types
of Agency gadgetry. Space again made this
impossible. 193/
- 138 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
4.41
25X9
EMI
mai
moi
gml
dig
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
to determine policy on these special studies, and its
recommendations were relayed to H&A for inclusion in
subsequent plans and cost estimates. 194/ At the
same time that the occupancy of the new building
was reduced from "Space
Directive D," parking spaces were reduced from 4,000
to 3,000. 195/
The "Tentative Drawings and Preliminary Out-
line Specifications" -- more than 100 of them --
were not received Until 2 August 1957. This submis-
sion included the "Project Directive," a 15-page
GSA form that outlined in detail the descriptive
data for the project based on the tentative sketches.
The project directive was an estimated and itemized
list of all work to be accomplished and all materials
to be used, with costs shown for each item at each
stage of.the project. It listed the estimated cost
of alternates, options, and substitutions. The
comprehensive document represented the combined
work of the many planners up to this date. 196/
A set of intermediate working drawings, more
than 500, and the first draft of the superstructure
specifications, more than 600 pages, were finally
- 139 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEU.K.E.L.
received on 3 February 1958, These plans with their
supporting documents were reviewed, marked up, and
checked by the planners, PBS and BPS, with 51 pages
of comments, all of which were returned to H&A on
5 March 1958. With this action, the plans and speci-
fications having been corrected, the intermeaiate
working drawings became the final approved working
drawings and specifications for the headquarters
building project. 197/
The steering committee then approved all actions
to date at its meeting of 7 March 1958; and later,
on 29 March 1958, the committee members visited the
site to observe the clearing and grading work then
in progress. 198/
The Building Planning Staff, 1957-1960
In a 17 December 1957 memorandum to the Chief
of BPS, the DDS described his visit to the Strategic
Air Command (SAC) Headquarters in Omaha, Nebraska.
In the new headquarters building there he had been
impressed with several items that he tklought should
be included in the Agency's building. He noted that
the SAC seal was tastefully displayed in the lobby,
- 140 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
4mr
Nal
.25X1 ?
41111
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
0441,-;4tta.
that closed-circuit television was used throughout
the building, and that the special projection equip-
ment used.in several of the large and small conference
and briefing suites was quite impressive.
was instructed to discuss these items and the sound-
proofing and floor-loading studies with H&A
next visit to the architect's office. 199/
would be discussing the ground-floor window
the security fence, parking facilities, the
telephone system, the pneumatic tube system
on his
problems,
"red"
and
protective construction methods with Abramovitz,
Crapster, and Ambrose. At about the same time,
with Roy J. Tuttle,. an engineer with Syska
& Hennessy, was having a series of meetings with
representatives of the area public utility companies,
with Commissioner J. A. Anderson .of the Virginia State
Highway Department, and with officials of the Fairfax
County government. 200/
25:0 prepared a staff study concerning
BPS's continuing relations with the architect-engineers
(A&E) office. Regardless of the quantity and thorough-
ness of the written material, as well as briefings and
tours given the A&E key people, many questions arose
- 141 -
SECRET
Annroved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Ail
mai
AMP
25X1
aid
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
during the course of the work. Members of BPS made
frequent trips to New York and did much to expedite
the A&E's work, but there was need for an Agency
employee with a well-rounded knowledge of the over-
all Agency organization and procedures who could
consult with the A&E's key people on a daily basis.
An experienced Agency man, at the GS-13 level or
above, who knew where to get information and who
would recognize the ramifications involved in any
question of organizational relationship or procedural
matter, would do much to expedite the progress of
the A&E and enable the work to proceed smoothly?
without irritating delays. The A&E had been given
all information necessary for the performance of
his contract on a "need-to-know" basis, and he was
provided with adequate secure areas, storage facil-
ities, and other security safeguards.
were being considered for this
TDY assignment to New York for a 9- to 12-month
period. 201/ It was later determined, however, that
the purpose of this assignment was mainly to safeguard
..? the Agency material being used and the detailed
- 142 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
awl
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
? SECRET
drawings and specifications being developed; conse-
quently
Office of Security were given this assignment in
lieu of a member of the BPS. The TDY began on 6 Au-
gust 1956 and was terminated on 31 July 1957. 202/
The BPS continued to operate as a staff of
D/OL until July 1960, when it again became a staff
of the
25X1 of RECD.
25X1
25X1
-a+ 25X1
MIN
ONO
25X1
became Chief of RECD at that
time; and, although he
for the new building,
25X1
The death of
retained his responsibilities
became Chief of BPS.
and resignations of
and the return of
to the Air Force added to the problems of
continuity in bringing
In addition to
25:0
a GS-11,
the new building into being.
only two other staff members,
, and a GS-05, had
continued in work pertaining to the new building.
Their contribution was recognized in a 1961 IG
Survey, which stated:
The services of these two individuals
represent value well beyond that.indi-
cated by their grade, for they serve
not only as working members of BPS,
but as points of reference for innumer-
able questions. 203/
- 143 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
25X1
25X1
ION
25X1
25X1
=Ng
ANN
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEC,KET
The spirit of cooperation and determination on the
part of the individual members of BPS over the years
was probably one .reason why the group had been able
to accomplish so much with so few people. The Survey
continued:
While we do not believe that there
is clarity in the organization and assign-
ment of responsibility, we do believe that
the Chief of RECD and the Chief of BPS
should be complimented for the spirited
effort of the members of the staff. 204/
who was formerly with
the Management Staff, assumed the position of Chief
of BPS in late August 1960 following the death of
In addition to his secretary, .
and an assistant,
also supervised seven persons in a unit which was
located in the Recreation and Services (R&S) Building
and which was physically separated from his office.
The R&S unit seemed to have had no name other than
the "Deep Freeze" -- so named because of continuous
heating and ventilating problems.
Another member of
a divil
the Agency representative at the build-
became chief of BPS he also
engineer, who was
ing site. When
retained his responsibilities as DDS liaison officer
- 144 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
25X1
25X1
25X1
rad
25X1
25X1
25X1
IMO
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEU.K.,E1
after replacing
25X1
in that job, and he served
representatives of nine
The new chief of BPS also
as the focal point for the
different DDS components.
assumed personal responsibility for coordination of
the actual*move to the new site.
According to the proposed table of organization,*
three members of the Deep Freeze unit --
an apprentice draftsman, and
,.a clerk -- were theoretically
detailed from
engineers --
the Space Allocations Section; two
(electrical) and
(mechanical) -- were detailed
from the Utilities Engineering Branch; and
an architect, was detailed from the Construc-
tion Engineering Branch. The seventh member of the
unit was a GS-05 clerk obtained on a rotating appoint-
ment from the Interim Assignment Section of OP while
awaiting final clearance,
Although this group was concerned with a wide
variety of problems and projects related to the new
building, the majority activity was fitting the
* At this time there was no formal T/O.
- 145
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
components, equipment, machinery, and furnishings
into the allocated space as defined by the space
directive. Members dealt with problems of location
of power outlets, telephone and other communications
systems, alarm systems, heating and ventilating
problems, and electrical problems pertaining to
special equipment. The unit was undermanned and
without any reserve strength. The workload was not
expected to increase greatly, however, and the
staff managed the remaining problems of the build-
ing completion as somewhat separate from the actual
opal
awl
mod
awl
move,
? It was inevitable that engineering personnel
and others familiar with the building would become
heavily involved in the actual.move. Afterthoughts
by various components, organizational adjustments,
and problems that no one had anticipated tended to
pyramid as the move date approached. The Deep
Freeze unit would need additional manpower in advance
of and during the move.
It should be noted that the space assignment
and space utilization, procedure (the
-146-
-
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
system*) that was adopted for the orderly planning
of contract changes and new building occupancy re-
quired the constant close attention of people with
a deep personal interest and with an architectural
and planning
new building
1961, it was
background.
Because
occupancy of the
was scheduled to begin by the fall of
necessary to have professional archi-
tects who could command respect when dealing with
Agency organizational elements, and the only
professional architect on the staff, had been as-
signed to work at
It.was also
move there should
the site, replacing
essential that in planning the
be electrical and mechanical
engineers on the staff; their expertise was needed
for updating information that had been accumulating
since 1956. With the exception of the "Walnut Activ-
ity"** and 10 or 15 partially completed information
* See Appendix L for a description of the '
System" and the National Capital Professional Achieve-
ment Award citation "To the Outstanding Young Archi-
tect," 25 February 1960.
** The Walnut Activity was the name used for the
DDP Computer Center to be located on the ground
floor of the new building.
- 147 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
?mmi
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
drawings, no itemization or equipment layouts for
utility requirements had been completely identified.
In general, consideration had been given almost exclu-
sively to space assignment and space utilization.
In addition to architects and engineers, the
staff needed people with planning ability; the design
work had been "fixed" by the contract drawings and
specifications, and there was a real need for assis-
tants with building planning experience and with
knowledge of the components' space and mechanical
requirements. Further there was a need for clerks
with visual-aid and drafting experience to keep the
space layouts up to date, to keep space assignment
records and organizational space totals, to run the
Ozalid machine (500 to 1,000 prints monthly), to
repair and replace acetate sheets, and to answer
questions and take messages. Workers with these
minimum skills were also needed at the site, in the
office of the chief of BPS and in the office of the
Movement Coordination Group. 205/ By the end of
1960, then, BPS was woefully understaffed to cope
with the move scheduled to begin in the fall of
1961.
owl
- 148 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R00030006noni_n
awl
mai
mai
oil
ing
ms0
NOV
MOP
IMMO
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
The Construction Period, 1957-1963
The first significant construction contract
was for the clearing and grubbing of the site. This
meant the removal of trees and brush from about half
of the acreage and the clearing or removal of dead
trees and underbrush from the rest of the tract.
The contract bid opening date was 12 September 1957.
Morrison and Johnson,.Tnc., of Bethesda, Maryland,
had the low base bid of $31,450.* Work was started
in October 1957 and completed in March 1958. By
this time another contract had been let for grading
.the site to bring it to the proper elevations de-
termined by the site planners and for the install-
ation of site drainage structures to carry off the
accumulation of surface water.. Under this contract,
preliminary roads, site parking, and storage areas
were being graded and given a gravel-surface treat-
ment to accommodate the building contractor's supplies
and equipment.
The summer and fall of 1957 were marked by
long dry spells ideal for construction work, but
* The high bid was $102,0001206/
- 149 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Erg
..1d1
- atI
ossi
mat
mei
owl
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUKE'r
almost as soon as the clearing and grubbing operations
started, heavy rains began to fall. The weather con-
tinued to be unfavorable most of winter of 1957-58,
although perhaps not unfavorable enough to block
completely the public relations ploy that the DDS
had in mind:
I also told him that
I wanted to make every possible effort
not only to let the grading contract as
soon as possible, but to have, some grad-
ing actually done before Congress returns
to town on the first of January. 207/
Although snowstorms were the worst for the
Washington area in many years and the spring and
summer rainfall in 1958 was well above normal, the
grading and drainage contract was substantially
finished by October 1958.* The excavation and
foundation contract, with a base bid of $2,289,000,
was opened on 9 October 1958; and on 21 October
1958, the notice to proceed was issued to the Roscoe
Engineering Corporation and the Ajax Construction
Co., Inc. of Washington, D. C., as a joint venture.
* The low and high bids for grading and drainage
were $460,000 and $1,113,000, respectively. The low
figure was less than half the amount ($1,030,000)
that had been allocated. 208/
- 150
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEL;Itt"1.
A question about one of the contractors had developed,
but the DDS noted that
25X1
25X1
I reported that after further examin-
ation of the bids for the Excavation and
Foundation Contract the architects,
Harrison & Abramovitz, the Public Build-
ings Service, and the Building Planning
Staff had concluded that we should go'
ahead and award the Contract to the low
bidder. General Cabell said that
had some reservations about one
member of the firm and asked me to check
it out before making a-final decision.
(Since I had not heard of this I checked
it with who said that the
information was correct but that he, repre-
sentatives of our Office of Security, and
the Public Buildings Service felt that
there were not sufficient grounds for
denying the firm a contract. I asked him
to prepare a memorandum to me along these
lines.) 209/
Up to this point the contracting work had been
performed on the site as a whole. Now the job of ex-
cavating and pouring the massive concrete foundations
for the Headquarters Building itself was a major step
into reality. It was estimated that from nine months
to a year were saved by making three separate con-
tracts for the preliminary work described above so
that while the work was in progress A&E and BPS
were preparing the complex and detailed plans required
? 4
for the main building. It might be pointed out that
- 151 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
MIN
assi
WWI
NOW
mill
wmi
ami
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
even as the plans and work proceeded, Agency repre-
sentatives were frequently harassed regarding the
need to incorporate features intended to provide
protection from atomic blast and/or fall-out. After
considerable badgering for his reluctance to move
into positive programs of this nature, the DDS finally
displayed asperity at a particularly bizarre proposal
that had somehow survived the first reading. In his
Diary Notes, White recorded that:
Milton Buffington was in to see me
about the Burkholder proposal to mine
basalt underneath our building, there-
by providing a bomb shelter. I am afraid
this matter is getting out of hand and
the Department of Defense seems to be
taking over. Buff has been to the meet-
25:0 ing with /ho wo ks for Norman
Paul but in s office.
25:0 is putting a great deal of
on us so that we will accept
osal without further delay.
25:0 is a former Congressman from
West Virginia (Democrat) who applied for
a job here some years ago and finally
got a job with the National Security
Agency. The Republican Administration.
saw to it that his job at NSA was
eliminated and that he was separated
from the Agency.) I called Norman Paul
and expressed my concern about this
proposal. I told him that we thpught
this was a unique proposal, that we
were very much interested in it, but
that we must first determine the
feasibility before we could talk about
acceptance and the submission of
pressure
this pro
- 152 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SE CRE't
legislation which would be necessary.
Norman agreed and at my request said
that he personally would chair the next
meeting which was to be within the next
day or two and attended by
Senator Robertson's Administrative
Assistant, Mr. Burkholder, and the
Chief Geologist of the State of
Virginia. 210/
Although construction work on the site had been
under way for more than a year, equally important work
had been started off the site in Langley area. The
new four-lane George Washington Memorial Parkway
leading to the site's north gate-house entrance had
been completely graded. Piers for the several bridges
on this parkway were completed. The entire Bureau
of Public Roads parkway project was paved and ready
for use early in 1960, well in advance of CIA's
actual moving date; and as early as July 1958 con-
struction work had been started to widen Virginia
route 123 leading to the south gate-house entrance.
The preliminary and continuing negotiations
related to the access roadway situation -- particularly
the problems of the George Washington Parkway and
the Cabin John bridge -- were complex.' The Agency
was involved With the Department of the Interior,
the Bureau of Public Roads, the National Park Service,
- 153 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
MEI
Mir
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
the Atomic Energy Commission, and the highway com-
missions and engineers of the District of Columbia,
Maryland, Virginia, and Fairfax County. 211/ Some
of the difficulties were ironed out by the "old
school tie": White did not hesitate to draw on his
broad military acquaintanceship to influence the
various engineering contingents, many of which were
headed by former general officers or colonels, and
at other times there was an opportunity for some
quid pro quo. In March of 1961, for example, the
DDSs Diary Notes stated:
General Clarke, the District Engineer,
and Mr. Aitken, his Highway Supervisor,
were over for lunch; however, General
Clarke and Mr. Aitken are very much con-
cerned about the traffic problem in con-
nection with getting to and from our new
building. They feel that the selection
of Chantilly particularly is going to jam
up the roads very much and that we may
have some congestion. They are looking
for some support to get the Chain Bridge
double-decked and to get another bridge
built at the Three Sisters Island loca-
tion. I told them that wo would certainly
give them full support and that this was
in our interest, but they should not put
us in the position of not having made an
adequate transportation study at the time
we selected this site. Gen. Clatke and
Mr. Aitken said they both fully appreciated
- 154
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECarl:
this and that their emphasis would all
be on developments since the site was
selected.* 212/
Fairfax County officials were proceeding with
the plans for extending water and sewer lines, and
the pumping stations required for these facilities
were under construction. Plans for the electric
power sub-station to supply the Headquarters Building
were well along by the spring of 1959.** A contract
had been let for the erection of the security fence
in August 1958, and by the middle of November the
site was under security patrol and security badges
had been issued to the contractors. 215/
The problems of physical security during the
construction of the new building were highly complex.
Between the fall of 1958 and February 1961, for ex-
ample, bona fides were obtained for about 15,000
* fn the fall of 1961 Clarke requested -- and
received -- a letter from the Agency in support of
his position on the need for a bridge at Three
Sisters Island. 213/
marl
MEI
awl
MOW
** In addition to the supply of electric power from
the Virginia Electric and Power Company, Agency
planners also modified the original construction
plans to include an instantaneous emergency generator
(diesel). White authorized a change order in August
1960, noting that it would cost about $50,000..214/
- 155 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
rrl
?Ani
sat
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
construction workers -- this in addition to the re-
quirements to plan building security, badging, guard
force, and the host of other security projects with
which the Office of Security was charged. 216/*
By the early summer of 1959 the excavation
foundation work was nearing completion.** The main
building contract -- that is, the superstructure
mod
* It was not until after the building was occupied,
however, that serious attention was paid to the potential
security risk posed by the four privately owned tracts
of land adjacent to the new building area. Shortly
after becoming DCI (29 November 1961), John A. McCone
ordered that a study of the feasibility of purchase
be undertaken. 217/ Consequently, White appointed
a committee to review this matter; and their findings
disclosed that the building was vulnerable to pene-
tration by surveillance. Photographs taken in the
wooded area adjacent to the front of the building
indicated the feasibility of identifying personnel,
with the possibility of identifying documents if they
were held in a manner advantageous to the potential
enemy. After considerable coordination by the DDS
and the DCI -- with Congressional committees, the
Fairfax County Executive, and the Bureau of the Budget
-- acquisition of the perimeter property was accomplished
by the m1d-1960's at a cost of approximately half a
million dollars. (See Appendix K.)
** NSA had already occupied its headquarters at Fort
did Meade, Maryland; and the AEC had moved into its new
building at Germantown, Maryland, during the spring
of the previous year. McCone had succteded Admiral
Lewis L. Strauss as Chairman of the AEC, and President
Eisenhower had laid the cornerstone for the nearly .
completed Department of State building. 218/
411111111
- 156 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
contract - had been advertised on 18 December 1958,
and bids were opened on 25 February 1959. Thirteen
bids were received, and on 25 March the contract was
awarded to Tompkins-Jones, a joint venture of the
Charles H. Tompkins Company and the J. A. Jones
Construction Company. The base bid, including seven
alternates, was $33,287,600, somewhat less than had
been expected.* The contract had gone on the con-
struction market at an opportune time; economic
conditions were favorable to the Government and to
the Agency.
Some superstructure work started in May 1959.
The contractor's first efforts were directed toward
organizing his work forces and executing the numerous
sub-contracts required for the project. Shop drawings
-- completely detailed plans based on the contract
* Of the $54,500,000 appropriated, $8.5 million was
transferred to the National Park Service for the ex-
tension of the George Washington Memorial Parkway to
the site. The superstructure and site work contract
for $33,287,600 discussed above, the contract with the
Otis Elevator Co. for $1,122,669, plus other fees
and contingency requirements approximated $43 million,
leaving an unobligated balance of approximately $3
million. This latter amount, which was considered.
"no year funds," was used for acquisition of additional
land (see p. 156, footnote) and construction of the
new printing plant at the site. 219/
? 157 ?
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
del
mai
Mei
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bhUli.,.8
drawings and used for fabricating and installing
structural steel, duct work, plumbing, and electrical
and mechanical facilities -- were being prepared.
The forms for the ground-floor concrete walls and
for the first-floor slab of the north half of the
building were nearly completed by mid-summer.*
The contractor had erected field construction offices
on the site for his personnel, Government represent-
atives, and representatives of A&E. Government and
A&E representatives were on the site every working
day and checked each step in the construction to see
that the work was done according to the plans. They
also reviewed all shop drawings. Samples of material
were submitted in advance for testing to ensure that
specification requirements were met. 220/
This group managed the project to its comple-
tion.
epresented the Agency
until he was replaced by
in August
* See Appendix P, Figure 13, for illustration of this
early construction
on the north half of the building.
25X1
**
is currently (1972) Chief, Architectural
Design
Staff,
Logistics Services Division, OL, on -
detail
from RECD/OL.
Amel
rasa
mei
- 158 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SAIAACE.1.
1960;
25X1
in turn, was replaced by
was a graduate
two years in the US
October 1960.
in January 1961.
civil engineer who had served
Army and had joined the Agency in
25X1
Although. he had only about three months' experience
with the organization, he handled the job with
competence and assurance. The project officer's
office adjoined that of the three representatives
of the A&E firm, who handled his telephone messages.
He initiated actions with the representatives of
the architects on adjustments and changes and signed
documents when the estimated cost was less than
$1,000. At times the project officen:could exceed
this figure after telephone confirmation from the
Chief of BPS; but for most higher cost items he
prepared the paper work and brought it to headquarters
for approval and signature by
25X1
221/ 25X1
The building contract called for completion
of the building by the middle of 1961, but a reason-
able amount of delay, frequently caused by conditions
beyond the contractor's control, was ekpected on a
project such as this. For example there was a strike
in the steel industry in August 1959. Had this
- 159 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
amid
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEGKE'l:
strike continued for an appreciable length of time,
it would have materially affected progress and de-
layed completion. There was every reason to be-
lieve, however, that the building would be completed
some time during the last half of 1961. By a
letter dated 9 July 1959, Tompkins-Jones had been
formally directed to proceed with the work. Actually
they had started preliminary work during May on
the basis of an informal arrangement with PBS.
The contract time started on 11 July and, unless
extended by changes or extra work, would expire
on 29 July 1961. As of 30 September 1959 this
contract was 3.52 percent complete. The contract
for the excavation and foundation was more than 95
percent complete by the end of September 1959.
Meanwhile BPS was reviewing all space layouts for
the purpose of adjusting them to fit changes in
the Agency's requirements. 222/
As of 31 March. 1960 the superstructure contract
was approximately 20 percent complete. The con-
tractor was slightly behind schedule, but except
for the month of March the winter weather had
- 160 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECKri
been reasonably favorable for his operations.
There had been a considerable number of relatively
small change orders, and as of 31 March 1960 it
did not appear that completion of the contract
would be extended materially. In fact such ex-
cellent progress was being made that a portion of
the concrete roof of the north penthouse had been
poured. As was customary when the highest point
on the construction project was reached, the work-
men held an impromptu flag-raising ceremony, and
for a day or two a flag flew from this roof-top.
Progress in the spring of 1960 was marred
by the only serious accident that occurred during
the entire course of the construction. In the \
words of the DDS:
There was an accident today at
Langley; apparently a cable broke
allowing the scaffolding at the power
building to fall. Ten people were hurt,
seven of them very seriously. At this
point one of the ten has died and another
remains on the critical list. 223/
Work had been started on the excavation for
the auditorium building, which was a separate hemi-
spheric structure near the front of the main buildihg
- 161 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R0003MnRnnni_n
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEGKEI:
but connected by a tunnel.* Structural steel had
been delivered to the job for the curved roof** of
the cafeteria building. Plantings for the three
large and two small court areas that are enclosed by
the building had been completed. This landscape
and planting contract was undertaken early in the
project so that all trees and shrubs requiring large
balls of dirt would be set in place before the
courts were entirely enclosed, 224/ and throughout
the construction period there was constant concern
* A story, perhaps apocryphal, is told that when
Lieutenant General Marshall S. Carter, the DDCI
(3 April 1962-28 April 1965), first saw the shape
of the auditorium he is reported to have commented
to the effect that he had admired things like that
ever since he was 16 years old, but he thought that
they always came in pairs.
** In his comments to the SSHO (10 Feb 71) on the
construction activities, Walter Pforzheimer noted that:
The curved roof of the cafeteria ...
brings to mind an interesting highlight
arising out of the Washington Evening Star
sending periodic flights over the building
to photograph the progress in its construc-
tion as a newsworthy item. In their issue
of 13 June 1960, they printed one of these
early views and caused us some laughing
embarrassment by their caption, which
noted, "The crescent-shaped objects at
left are decorative water-falls.' Actually
they were the curved steel girders,. not yet
installed, which hold up the roof of the
cafeteria! .
- 162 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bkA_Ais-r,
about preserving the "campus" -- to the point where
in one instance it added $60,000 to the billl*
By the end of September 1960 the superstructure
contractor had completed an additional 34 percent
of his work. This brought the building contract to
a status of 54 percent complete. The contractor was
slightly behind schedule, but this was mainly a
continuance of the earlier delays. The north half
of the building was expected to be ready for occupancy
The DDS recorded in his Diary Notes:
Met with Jim Garrison and
to discuss landscaping changes at the
new building. There are three large
areas in which trees are growing in a
considerable depression. Water collects
to such an extent that drains are plugged
up; consequently, the areas are not only
unsightly but in all probability the trees
are going to die before we move into the
building. Mike Rapuano of Clarke and
Rapuano admits that his people made a
mistake in trying to preserve these trees.
It is now estimated that it will cost some
$60,000 to rectify it, especially in view
of the fact that there is not sufficient
dirt available to fill in all three of
the holes. I authorized
to go ahead and negotiate to fill in one
of them -- for which we do have ample
dirt -- and to contemplate, at least for
the moment, on filling in the other two
if and when we construct an auxiliary
building, at which time we will again
have plenty of "fill" available without
buying it.,225/
- 163 -
SECRIFIT
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R00030006nnni_n
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
by September 1961. It was almost completely enclosed,
and plastering of the interior walls was proceeding
on the lower level floors. Except for the seventh-
floor roof of wings 1 and 2 and the penthouse roof,
all of the structural slabs had been poured for the
south half of the building, and precast concrete
window panels had been installed up to the fourth-
floor level. The structural steel covering for the
cafeteria roof had been erected and installed.
The BPS had reviewed space assignment layouts
for floors two through seven in the south half of
the building. Plans were being developed with the
telephone company to begin installing equipment for
the north half of the building. Space layouts were
being used by Agency components to plan requirements
for unitized furniture, location of floor outlets,
and determination of the necessary types of telephone
service. 226/ Normal telephone installation was
complicated by the additional requirements for a
secure internal system and an intercom among the
Director, the Deputy Directors, and the Office/Divi-
sion Chiefs. Both the Offices of Security and Com-
munications were concerned with the problem. 227/
- 164 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
m44
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUICL,1
As of 5 December 1960 the DDS had approved a
"freeze" on contract plan changes that had been reviewed
and approved by all components and the steering com-
mittee A review of the justification for change
proposals would be postponed until occupancy had
been completed. 228/
The superstructure contract was 78 percent
40i complete as of 31 March 1961. The work had been
delayed because of bad weather, but, occupancy of
dad
the north half of the building, to begin in September
1961, would not be affected appreciably. The entire
Psi
building was now enclosed, and plastering had been
completed in the north half. The structural dome
for the auditorium had been erected, and the floor
slab had been poured. The Main entrance marque was
structurally complete. The BPS had produced informa-
tion and revised contract drawings involving parti-
tion revisions, medical, X-ray, and projection equip-
ment, and the instantaneous generator for the signal ?
centers. The plans for furniture layouts were retem-
plated from standard to unitized furniture. Telephone
service orders and wiring diagrams were completed for .
50 percent of the north half of the building. Special
- 165 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bk.,U.K-b
requirements for power were reviewed, and service
fitting location plans for 75 percent of the north
half of the building were sent to the PBS construc-
25:0 tion engineer,
229/
As of 30 September 1961, Tompkins-Jones had
brought completion of their construction contract to
96 percent. The "official estimate" for completion
of the work remaining in the south half, furnished
GSA by the contractor, was February 1962.
At the same time BPS produced additional infor-
mation and contract changed drawings and made a final
review of all furniture layouts, telephone service
orders, and wiring diagrams. Other special require-
ments and layouts for power and service fitting loca-
tions were sent to the construction engineer of PBS,
bringing the BPS work submission total to 86 percent. 230/
The Laying of the Cornerstone, 3 November 1959
On 24 September 1958 the DDS had submitted for
the DCI's approval the proposals that the Building
Planning Staff had prepared for the oficial corner-
stone laying ceremony -- a ceremony that would not,
in fact, take place until well over a year later, on
- 166 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bEl.A.L(Z,
3 November 1959. Simple as it may appear, the plan-
ning and execution of the cornerstone ceremony was
time-consuming and tedious and fraught with the perils
of protocol violations! 231/*
The cornerstone was to be designed by the
Architect-Engineer, and decisions had to be made on
the size, shape, type of stone, style of cutting,
sizes and types of lettering to be used, and place-
ment. Also it had to be determined whose names
should appear on the stone; this would have some
effect on the design of the stone. It was decided
that those whose names were to appear on the stone
were President Eisenhower, the DCI, the DDCI, the
DDS,
Franklin Floete
(General Services Administrator), F. Moran McConihe
(Commissioner Public Buildings Service), Wallace K.
Harrison and Max Abramovitz (Architects) Frederic
* On protocol, pre-Women's Lib vintage, a memo from
the DDS to the Executive Officer, Office of the Director,
noted that an allocation of reserved seats should be
parceled out among employees at the E0.'s discretion
but "...the Director is anxious to see some of the
women employees of the Agency in attendance in order
to highlight the vital role which women play in the
Agency." 232/
- 167 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Wit
oalil
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
b_ltkAti...C., 1
25X1A
R. King (Associate Architect), and Charles H. Tompkins
Co., J. A. Jones Construction Co. (Builders).*
Once the matters of design and names were resolved,
the question of the contents of the box to be deposited
behind the stone had to be determined. This posed
various problems, including the question of whether
or not classified documents would form part of the
contents; they were excluded.**
The question of principal speakers for the
cornerstone-laying ceremony, was effectively resolved
by the decision to keep the affair simple. .The USAF
band would provide music: a prelude, the National
Anthem, and a postlude. The DCI would make a few
brief introductory remarks, and then President Eisen-
hower would make his address. For the invocation and
benedication,
it was decided that it would be ap-
propriate if the Rev. Frederick Brown
Harris, Chaplain of the U. S. Senate,
were to give the Invocation and
* Appendix P, Figures 11 and 12, display photographs
of the cornerstone and the stone layin4 ceremony.
** Appendix M.provides details on both the problems
of selecting materials for the cornerstone box and
the fabrication of the box itself.
- 168 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEU.K.ti
Benediction. Somehow, Col. White, to
[Rev.] Harris' amazement, located the
Reverend somewhere in the deep South
to issue the invitation. The length
of the Invocation far exceeded any
staff study CIA had ever prepared and
threatened to keep us there until
darkness fell. 233/
Among the groups and individuals who had to be
invited as special guests were the chairmen and members
of Congressional committees concerned with CIA, members
of the National Security Council, the Director of the
National Security Agency,.the Administrator of General
Services, the architects.(Harrison and Abramovitz),
consultants to the architect, key officials of other
agencies associated with CIA, and representatives of
the press. On the platform for the actual ceremony
were the President, the DCI, the DDCI, the DDS, former
DCI's Hillenkoetter and Souers, Mrs. Walter B. Smith
(the widow of the former DCI), the Administrator of
General Services, the Commissioner of Public Buildings
Service, and the Reverend Mr. Harris. Other special
guests, the architects, the contractor, and various
CIA officials had reserved seats set aside in the
audience.
- 169 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060oni_n
4.4
01111
Nal
41111111
VINO
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEGRE't ?
Much of the equipment that was needed for the
ceremony -- the speakers' stand, chairs, comfort
stations, and the public address system -- was
provided by the National Park Service on a reimburs-
able basis; and Park Service employees were made
available (also on a reimbursable basis) to assist
with the arrangements. The south parking lot and
some of the roads at the building site required a
gravel surface; and in anticipation of the large
crowd, local police were asked for assistance in
handling automobile traffic. An ushering service
composed of some of the Agency's most attractive .
young ladies was set up, and a stopping point for
chauffeur-driven cars to discharge their passengers
at a point near the seats was arranged..
A contractor's assistant was required to assist
in handling the cornerstone; the tobls and equipment
were also provided by the contractor. It is inter-
esting to note that although it appeared that the
President and others who participated were cementing
the cornerstone into place, the "cement" actually
was a non-holding mixture of sugar and water, and
the box in place was only a temporary one. As soon
- 170 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708Rnnnqnnnannn4
sad
mai
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
as the guests had departed from the 1959 ceremony,
the cornerstone and the box were removed and were
permanently put into place a year later.
There was little question but that the printed
program of the cornerstone ceremony should be rather
impressive; the basic questions involved the content.
Such a brochure usually serves as a means of recognizing
the contributions made by firms and individuals whose
names, because of custom and space limitations, are
not inscribed on the building cornerstone. These would
include the consultants to the Architect, such as
Syska & Hennessy, Edwards & Hjorth, Clarke & Rapuano,
Frederick W. Post, and others. Consideration was
given to the Architect listing the members of his
staff who took part in the work on the CIA building;
GSA was consulted to determine whether some of their
officials should be listed; and it Was also suggested
that, within the limits of security, consideration be
given to recognition of the work of CIA personnel
who served in various capacities in connection with
the planning of the building.
171 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
In the printed program* the comments about the
architects were brief, stating only:
Architects for the building are
Harrison & Abramovitz with Frederic
R. King, Associate Architect. The
building is being erected by Charles
H. Tompkins Company and J. A. Jones
Construction Company, Joint Venturers.
The Public Buildings Service of the
General Services Administration is the
contract agent for the building and is,
supervising the work.
Pictures of the President and the Director, a
reproduction of the rendering of the building, a
description of the building, and a list of the docu-
ments placed behind the cornerstone were also suggested
for inclusion in the program brochure. In view of the
active employee interest in the new building some
programs were printed. In addition to the
printed programs, engraved invitations requesting an
R.S.V.P. were sent to the special guests.**
The planning of press announcements was coor-
dinated with James Hagerty, White. House Press Secretary.
* Copies of the printed program and other related
materials from the official ceremony are available
in both HIC and in the document files of the Historical
Staff (see HS/HC 327).
* *
Appendix N is a copy of the invitation.
- 172 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
old
mool
WOO
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEU.K.U.,
It was customary for the White House to release such
announcements rather than to put the responsibility
on the sponsoring agency. In addition the details
of arrangements for accommodations for the newsreel,
television, and other reporters were worked out with
Mr. Hagerty and the Secret Service. The DCI presented
engraved silver trowels to the President, to the
Honorable Neil H. McElroy, Secretary of Defense, and
the Honorable Robert D. Murphy, Deputy Under Secretary
of State, in commemoration of their participation in
the ceremony; and two trowels went to the CIA col-
lection, one used by the President and the other by
the DCI. In addition, a sixth engraved trowel was
retained by the DCI.
As recommended by the planners, a "package"
containing the following items was sent to each over-
seas station and base: a copy of the program, the
DCI's remarks, the President's remarks, the invocation
and benediction, selected press coverage of the event,
and a few photographs of the ceremony.*
* A copy of this package is available in the docu-..
ment files of the CIA Historical Staff (bee HS/HC
327).
- 173 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
41?1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
The cornerstone laying ceremonies were held on
3 November 1959,* and after the invocation Mr. Dulles
made the following introductory remarks:
The laying of this cornerstone marks
an important stage in the growth of the
Central Intelligence Agency. We will
soon have a home of our own, in these
.inspiring surroundings high above the
Potomac.
The Agency was established 12 years
ago by the same Act of Congress which
created the National Security Council
and the Department of Defense. Thus
the Central Intelligence Agency was
recognized as one of the important
elements in our national security struc-
ture.
World War II and its aftermath and
the international communist threat had
already brought home to us that our
vital interests were at stake in places
as distant as Korea, and Laos, in Africa
and the Islands of the Pacific, as well
-
as in this Hemisphere and in Europe.
Since then, our country's ever ex-
panding responsibilities have increased
the need for better information from
the four corners of the earth and for
sound analysis of that information.
The law creating the Agency was
ir voted by a Congress in which there was
a Republican majority. It was sponsored
wog
mai
4
* The cornerstone and the cornerstone box were
placed in their permanent locations in a brief cere-
mony presided over by the DDS on 2 November 1960. 234/
- 174 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUR.E.11:
and signed by a Democratic President.
For the past crucial years it has had
the unfailing support of a Republican
President and a Democratic Congress.
Facts have no politics.
Our charter, in the carefully drafted
provisions of the National Security Act,
has undergone no changes. It provided
that, under the direction of the Presi-
dent and of the National Security Council,
the Agency shall correlate and evaluate
intelligence relating to the national
security, and perform such additional
services of common concern in this field
as the National Security Council may
direct.
Wisely this legislation provides
that we should have no domestic internal
security functions. Yet the scope of
the jurisdiction granted is ample. Our
work is broad and comprehensive enough
to enlist the interest and to inspire
the devotion of those who choose, and
are chosen, to enter upon it.
Laws can create agencies of govern-
ment; they cannot make them function.
Only the high purpose and dedication
of all serving them can weld them into
effective instruments for our national
security.
In this work of intelligence we must
not forget human beings are largely the
creatures of their beliefs. As individ-
uals we tend instinctively, and sometimes
wistfully, to become attached to.causes,
to theories, to solutions.
If they be sound and enduring, based
on the deep moral strivings of man and
the highest conception of our national
- 175
?\
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
interests, let us cling to them. But
in the field of our relations with our
fellowmen abroad, let us assure our-
selves, through accurate intelligence
that our attachments to policies are
soundly based.
It is the particular duty of this
Agency to help perform this function
in a world where change is the rule
rather than the exception. This task
must be carried out fearlessly, with-
out warping to meet our prejudices or
our predilections or even the tenets
of existing policy.
As we build a new edifice in which
to house, to concentrate and coordinate
our work, we must rededicate ourselves
to this high purpose.
The guiding motto to be inscribed
on the face of this building will be
the words taken from the Gospel
according to St. John: "Ye shall
know the truth, and the truth shall
make you free."
The President of the United States
has graciously consented to lay the,
cornerstone.
President Eisenhower responded to the introduc-
tion with these remarks:
America's fundamental aspiration
is the preservation of peace. To this
.end we seek to develop policies and
arrangements to make the peace both
permanent and just. This can be done
only on the basis of required informa-
tion.
? 176 ?
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
at.:U.K.E.
In war nothing is more important to
a commander than the facts concerning
the strength, dispOsition and intention
of his opponent, and the proper inter-
pretation of those facts. ? In peacetime
the necessary facts are of a different
nature; They deal with conditions,
resources, requirements and attitudes
prevailing in the world. They are
essential to the development of. policy
to further our long-term national security
and best interests. To provide informa-
tion of this kind is the task of the or-
ganization of which you are a part.
No task could be more important.
Upon the quality of your work depends
in large measure the success of our ef-
fort to further the nation's position
in the international scene.
By its very nature the work of this
agency demands of its members the high-
est order of dedication, ability, trust-
worthiness and selflessness -- to say
nothing of the finest type of courage,
whenever needed. Success cannot be
advertised; failure cannot be explained.
In the work of Intelligence, heroes are
undecorated and unsung, often even
among their own fraternity. Their in-
spiration is rooted in patriotism --
their reward can be little except the
conviction that they are performing a
unique and indispensable service for
their country, and the knowledge that
America needs and appreciates their
'efforts. I assure you this is indeed
true.
The reputation of your organization
for quality and excellence, under the
leadership of your Director, Mr. Allen -
Dulles, is ?a proud one.
- 177 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
owl
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bk.:UK-L.1
?
Because I deeply believe these things,
I deem it a great privilege to participate
in this ceremony of cornerstone laying for
the national headquarters of the Central
Intelligence Agency. On this spot will
rise a beautiful and useful structure.
May it long endure, to serve the cause
of peace. 235/ ,
In addition to White, the DDS, and other Agency
personnel who had planned the ceremonies, kudos went
to the Honorable Elwood R. Quesadd, head of the Federal
Aviation Agency, who on short notice arranged for
rerouting the National Airport traffic away from the
site during the ceremony; the Secretary of the Interior,
the Honorable Fred A. Seaton, for his most helpful
suggestions and the assistance of the National Capital
Parks authorities for on-site traffic control and
parking; the Chief Of the Metropolitan Police Depart-
ment for orderly flow of offsite traffic; the Com-
manding General of the Military District of Washing-
ton, Major General Charles K. Galley, for arranging
the movement by bus of 5,000 guests to and from the
ceremony -- a monumental task; the Commanding Officer
of the US Army Communications Agency, Colonel Walter
A. Kneyse, for arranging on short notice the field
land-line communications system, highly essential
- 178 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
mat
IMO
rag
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEURE1:
to the smooth running of the ceremony; the Chief of
Protocol, the Honorable Wiley T. Buchanan, Jr., for
countless suggestions on the seating plan, the
ceremonial order, and all other phases of the
'ceremonies; the Chief of the US Secret Service, U.
E. Baughman; the Chief of Police of Fairfax County,
Major William L. Durrer; and the Chief of Police of
Arlington County, Major William G. Fawer. Many
others were involved in this effort, and apprecia-
tion was extended to them by the DCI and DDS.
The Occupancy of the Building, 1960-1962
The actual transfer operations were planned by
BPS with the assistance of the DCI, the DDI, the DDP,
and the DDS liaison officers, and representatives
from subordinate offices and divisions. The coor-
..
dination of the plans and the move schedule with
the three contract movers fell logically to BPS.
Some concern over the load being carried by the
Chief of BPS was expressed in the June 1961 report
of the IG's survey of OL:
In addition to his over-all duties
the Chief, BPS is supervisor of the
"Deep Freeze" unit, coordinates the
planning and execution of the move,
- 179 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUKE I
and is liaison officer for nine DDS
representatives. As the date approaches
for the actual completion of the build-
ing and the move, we believe that the
Chief, BPS will run out of time and
that some of his responsibilities should
be redelegated. 236/
The DCI approved the tentative moving schedule
contained in the BPS Monthly Report dated 11 January
1961. He specifically agreed that he and his immed-
iate staff would be among the last elements to move
into the new quarters, quarters that might not be
ready until early December. He also agreed to the
publication of a series of information bulletins to
keep employees posted about the status of the con-
struction and the anticipated move. The DCI also
asked that a study be made of the feasibility of
inviting the families of Agency employees to inspect
the new building on a given week end in June or July. 237/
In addition to the information bulletins, a
booklet concerning various aspects of the move and
containing a questionaire regarding personal problems
that the move might create was issued on 19 May 1961
to the 7,300 people scheduled to move to the new
building. Although BPS helped prepare the booklet'
? 8 ?
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
the responsibility for interpretation and action on
the data resulting from the questionaire was assumed
by the Office, of Personnel. These data disclosed,
25)(9 for example, that of
employees who responded
to the questionaire only 110 anticipated personal
problems that were related to the move.* OP also
* Had the Office of Personnel sent out its question-
naire in its original form, the responses might have
been considerably different. The DDS noted that
25X1
25X1
25X1
yowl
ON
Mai
telephoned to say
that he was very much concerned about
a report he received from his Adminis-
trative Officer growing out of
meeting in which it was announced
at a questionaire would soon be circu-
lated, inquiring as to whether people
wanted to move to the new building or not.
feels very strongly
that this is wrong and that it would
cause a great deal of trouble insofar
as the Office of Communications is con-
cerned. I have since discussed this with
Emmett Echols and and disap-
proved their questionaire as drafted. I
feel very strongly that we must assume
that our employees are going to go with
us and that if we distribute a questionaire
asking them whether they would like to stay
in town we are going to cause ourselves a
great deal of trouble and do ourselves
very little good. I have directpd that
the Office of Personnel amend this
questionaire and that they also modify
their proposed notice so as to eliminate
the duplication which would otherwise exist
between their notice and the flier we are
preparing in the Building Planning Staff. 238/
- 181 -
SECRET?
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECRET
assumed responsibility for conducting a survey to
determine numbers of parking spaces required at the
new building, numbers planning to use public trans-
portation, and numbers reqpiring assistance in joining
or forming car pools. These data were subsequently
used to obtain public transportation service for
Headquarters Building employees.
Space changes and moves of components remaining
in Washington were coordinated by
a special assistant in the office of the chief of
RECD. Problems of coordination for the move -- as
separate from, but closely related to, the problems
of completing the building -- Were increasing. The
chief of RECD and the chief of BPS decided that an
officer with an assistant and with clerical help.
would be assigned to coordinate the planning and
execution of the move. 239/ During the summer of
1961 two officers,
from the Management Staff
assigned to BPS to assist
dination and planning operations
of the DDS, were
with the coor-
required to move
the Agency into the new building. 240/
- 182 -
? SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Skit,_;AZ
On 17 August 1961 D/OL held the second of two
meetings to discuss and align, the functional respon-
sibilities that had been assigned to, or had gravitated
to, the major component liaison officers. The roles
to be filled by officers and elements of OL were examined
to determine if they met the anticipated needs for
assistance, information, and guidance. Despite the
"Master Plan for Relocation of Agency Components" --
16 annexes, four appendixes, and three tabs', all of
which had been assembled by the OL Planning Staff and
approved by the DDS on 13 July 1961 -- this meeting
exposed areas that still required clarification of
responsibilities.
Presumably one of the' subjects for consideration
at the OL meeting concerned the status of the DDP
elements. 'Even though Richard Helms* had advised
the DDS in September 1960 that he was'very pleased
with the plans for the DDP space allocations
We will have optimum flexibility for
moving units within the space assigned,
while preserving sound standards of pri-
vacy for intelligence officers and Of
working conditions generally. These
have been our main targets in the plan-
ning phase fat the building. 241/
* Currently (December 1972) the DCII then the Acting
DDP.
- 183 -
. SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bEI,A.K.C. 1
-- by June 1961 the President's Foreign Intelligence
Advisory Board (PFIAB) expressed some reservations
about locating DDP elements in the Headquarters
Building.
? In a 24 June 1961 memorandum to the DCI,
McGeorge Bundy, Presidential Advisor for National
Security Affairs, requested that the DCI review and
comment on the PFIAB proposal that "...'the reloca-
tion of the CIA clandestine services [be] in another
place." The PFIAB also suggested to the President
that "... it may be appropriate to house in the new
building some of the non-clandestine functions of the
Central Intelligence Agency which are now scheduled
to be relocated to other buildings in Washington." 242/
Dulles's response to the PFIAB suggestions
followed by a few days the OL meeting on the moving
plans, and its direct and unequivocal tone made
clear that a reshuffling of DDP space was not about
to be imposed on OL or BPS. A summary of Dulles's
remarks follows:
a. Ever since the project for a
headquarters building was first in-
itiated, we have been reviewing the
feasibility and the security of our
program for its occupancy and the
- 184 - ?
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUREI:
selection of personnel to occupy it. We
consider the plans which have been made
to be feasible. We do not consider it
feasible to secure quickly an appropriate
alternate site for the clandestine serv-
ices.
b. All of our clandestine personnel
will not be moved to the new headquarters
building. All truly clandestine opera-
tions involving contact with undercover
or secret agents, American or foreign,
are, and will be, carried out elsewhere.
Facilities are available for this purpose.
We propose to improve and increase such
facilities.
c. We do not consider it now feasible
to house the major part of our clandestine
services personnel, other than those under
deep cover or abroad, outside of the build-
ing. We will however continue to make
every effort to increase cover arrangements',
domestically and abroad, in order to reduce
the relative number of clandestine person-
nel in headquarters or in identifiable .
field offices abroad.
d. We plan to take advantage of the
move to the new building to review and
to improve our operational security
practices, particularly those having to
do with persons under deep cover.
e. As new personnel come aboard who
have had no prior identification with
CIA, we endeavor to determine at the
outset whether or not their anonymity
should be guarded and from the very
beginning take the necessary steps to
accomplish this. This existing program
will be followed aggressively.
- 185 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
? f. About 65 per cent of the space
in the new building will not by occupied
by the clandestine services. We have
endeavored to assign to this space in
the building those categories of non-
members of the clandestine services who
have had the most thorough security
checks.
g. In many countries of the world,
and to many secret and security serv-
ices of the world, CIA has become a
symbol of one important phase of the
American initiative to combat inter-
national Communism and a rallying
point for those who wish to organize
to uncover and thwart communist intrigues.
Adverse publicity, such as attended the
Cuban episode, is obviously harmful.
Butsthe image of a strong, effective
and vigilant U.S. intelligence service
is an asset and dignified publicity to
this end is better than silence. Further,
it helps to bring defections to our side
and it has helped us to help other
friendly foreign services to help them-
selves. The image of an American Intel-
ligence Service that is being fragmented
and "running for cover" because of recent
adverse and passing publicity will not
be encouraging to our friends abroad and
will bring satisfaction to the Kremlin
which for years has made CIA a major
target. This was not the type of organ-
ization the Congress publicly created by
the Security Act of 1947.* 243/
? - 186
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
mai
MEI
mai
and
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bEl..iitt,
The PFIAB accepted the Director's judgment and said
nothing further about the dispersal of DDP personnel.
A footnote to the story of the new building
that might be mentioned at this point concerns Dulles's .
great personal interest in the building activity,
an interest which sometimes caused his subordinates
considerable anguish. The DCI's insistence that the
Biblical quotation, "And Ye Shall Know the Truth
and the Truth Shall Make You Free," be fixed in stone
at the entrance as the Agency motto apparently met
with no objection; 244/ there is no indication that
much, if any, attention was given to his suggestion
that
we consider naming our auditorium at the
new building the "Donovan Memorial Audi-
torium." He [Dulles] thought that Gen-
eral Donovan's estate might make a con-
tribution for the Memorial and that we
might otherwise raise money for this
purpose. 245/
Nor did his desire for "a large and luxurious conference
room with. a 'view'" appear unreasonable. 246/
Dulles's rather sudden interest in having a
dwelling for the Director of the Agency constructed
at the Langley site was less easily ignored. In
- 187 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
br.A..).K...C.,
the summer of 1959, soon after the idea seems to have
germinated, the DDS.discussed the matter with the
General Counsel;* and the latter was of the opinion
that such a residence 'would create very unfavorable
publicity. 247/ In the spring of 1960, after the
DCI himself had raised the question with the House
Appropriations Committee, the General Counsel pre-
pared a written memorandum noting the difficulties
such construction would present; but
the Director ... was quite exercised and
apparently unhappy about the General
Counsel's memorandum pointing out the
difficulties, if not the impossibility,
of building a residence for the Director
of Central Intelligence at Langley. 248/
In the early winter of 1960, the DCI continued
to express high interest in the matter of a residence
on the campus:
He [Dulles] again raised the question of-
a house for the Director near the new
building and said he felt very strongly
that there should be such a house even
though he might never live in. it. He
said that in increasing numbers he is
required to see people at his house simply
because they do not wish to be seen visit-
ing a government building. He thinks
that this house should be big enbugh to
* Lawrence R. Houston.
- 188 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEU,Kh
have conferences of eight or ten. He
also thinks that it would be much better
from a security standpoint to have the
house near the new building so that
direct telephone lines could be Strung,
etc. (I have asked Jim Garrison and H.
to prepare a paper on this
also.) 249/
Despite the DCI's effort, however, his proposals for
an official residence never came to reality.
In addition to the already mentioned "Master
Plan for Relocation of Agency Components," 47 "Special
Relocation Bulletins" (SRB's) were issued on various?
subjects, specific and general, in the period from
16 August 1961 through 18 June 1962. 250/ The SRB's
were printed on a special blue paper to distinguish
them from other memoranda, and according to the ,
recollection of one witness,
They were written in a prose style
that not even a mother could love, and
it was inevitable that sooner or later
a parody would appear -- and appear it
did. On blue paper and in the same form
as the regular "Relocation Bulletins,"
some prankster produced a "Relocation
Bulletin" on the use of the toilets.
It was very funny to everyone who saw
it, except the senior personnel in the
DDS and General Cabell. All copies
were immediately sought out for destruc-
tion. I seem to recall that Security
was asked to find the perpetrator of
the horrendous feat but, as I think the
- 189 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
mei
woo
MOP
rime
ammi
IOW
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bk.,WCZ
author was a member of the-Office of '
Security, I do not believe he was ever
surfaced.* 251/.
The Headquarters Building was originally scheduled
to be completed by the spring of 1962, but sufficient
progress had been made on the north half of the build-
ing to permit the first phase of the move -- that of
some DDI elements -- to begin on 19 September 1961.
This permitted all components in the area of the
Roosevelt Island Bridge approaches to be moved by
21 October.**
* The Historical Staff has been equally unsuccessful
in its attempts to locate a copy of this infamous
document.
* *
Mr. Pforzheimer, Curator, HIC, recalled that:
At the time of the first move, I think the
far end of the DDP part of the building was
still partially open so that heavy equip-
ment could be brought in. ?This resulted in
another story about the building which is
a fond memory to many of us. As cold
weather approached, and that far end of
the building was still partially open, the
building became infested with the cutest
collection of field mice you ever saw.
In the course of serious, dictation, sober-
minded DDI'ers would be interrupted by
piercing shreaks (sic] from theit secre-
taries which would herald the fact that
another mouse had just appeared. In the
Historical Intelligence Collection we were
(footnote continued on following page)
- 190 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Aonkt
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEGRE't
? Three separate PBS contracts were let to accom-
plish the move of CIA furnishings and equipment to
the headquarters location. Merchants Transfer and
Storage Company was awarded the first and last con-
tract. The Roy M. Hamilton Company of Cincinnati,
Ohio, was the other contractor.
The building planners must have breathed a
collective sigh of relief once the DDI elements began
to move into the new building. Beginning in 1957
and continuing even after the completion of the move,
the DDI, Robert Amory, engaged the planners in a
sends of disputes over the space allocations and
floor plan layouts for the DDI area. The DDI did
have legitimate reasons for objection to the location
awl
IMO
MPS
continually setting mousetraps with devastating effect,
including the fact that the Curator's extremely squeamish
secretaries would not empty them, and that task fell
on the Curator himself. Not only was the building
open at the far end, but the cafeteria was not yet
open, and everyone was eating out of the vending
machines or "brown bagging it." Thus the mice had
a never ending supply of food. The mice also had
the habit of chewing through telephone wires and
once chewed their way through the special gray phone
wires creating a security, problem which resulted in
having to. have the mice cleared! Thus, do legends
grow. 252/
- 191 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
mai
STATSPEC
tiel
mod
SIMI
mit
en*
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
'siuiui
and layout of the OCR library, but he had less justi-
fication for vacillation about the desirability of
including or excluding various of the DDI components
in the new building -- at one time or another OBG,
and the map library were all involved in
the discussions. That the equanimity of the DDS was
obviously disrupted by the DDI's indecision became
apparent in the early discussions of utilization of
space in the new building. Specifically the DDS noted
that he
Had a discussion both on the
squawk box and later in the day with
Bob Amory about the new building.
Bob is, in my judgment, somewhat ir-
rational about his desires to close
up the library deal, put the Office'
of Basic Intelligence back into the
building, etc. At his suggestion
that we thrash the whole thing out
with the. Director I readily agreed,
at which point he backed water
considerably. I.told him that I
was fed up with his threatening to
go to the Director at any time he
didn't get what he wanted in con-
nection with the new building and
that I wanted him to understand
fully that I was prepared to meet .
with him and the Director at any
hour of the day or night, without
any advance notice, on his or any
aspect of the building. I also
told him that the DD/I area was
- 192 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bEL1(...t,
slower than any other component
in supplying the information that
we needed to pass on to the archi-
tect and that unless we got his
information very soon it would be
necessary to stop work on the
building again. 253/
Among the other annoyances which, at one time
or another, the DDI brought to the attention of the
DDS or the DCI were.the following:
(1) "Very strong opposition" to plans
for ground floor windows.
.(2) Use of asphalt tile rather than
more expensive flooring in the library.
(3) Delay in moving -- if not total
exclusion -- of NIS personnel and Bio-
graphic Register into new building.
(4) The receptionist at the northeast
entrance to the new building.
(5) The morning rush hour traffic
pattern over Key Bridge, temperature in
new building, and empty vending machines.
(6) Security's objection to the use
of organizational component signs on
office doors.
(7) Credit Union hours and need for
US mail boxes. 254/
The emphasis on the DDI complaints is not intended to
imply that the other directorates haeno problems at
the time of the planned move to the new building.
The question of adequate space for the DD/P contingent
was the subject of serious discussion from 1959 until
- 193 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
the actual move. The basic problems with DDP were
to determine the actual number of bodies that were
to be accommodated and whether or not the whole of
DDP should be moved into the new building, even at
the expense of space for the DDI or DDS.* 255/
The cafeteria was not completed until 28 Febru-
ary 1962, but in October 1961 necessary kitchen
facilities were available to permit a limited opera-
tion in the table-service dining area. Vending
machine rooms were put into operation on the floors
being occupied. As components moved into their new.
quarters, they found that new unitized furniture
had replaced all Class "C" furniture,** and had been
pre-positioned with telephones in place ready to be
* Perhaps because the DDS, White, was in charge
of the overall planning for the Headquarters con-
struction activity, space and other problems of the
DDS components appear infrequently in the Diary Notes.
In January of 1961 a request from
Director of the Office of Communications,
space was rejected. 256/
for additional
** As a result of year-end savings during 1960 and
1961, these funds totalling $1,298,900, were applied
along with $340,000 obtained from the Director's
Special Projects Fund (subject to DDS recommendation
and DCI approval) for procurement of unitized furnieh-
ings.
- 194 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEUKEE
cut over to the new numbers. For mechanical and
security reasons, certain facilities were not available
until the entire building was occupied. These in-
cluded the pneumatic tube and conveyor systems. Al-
though incinerator chutes were being made available
for depositing classified trash during the period of
interim occupancy, the material could not be burned
in the building until later. The north parking lot,
with spaces for approximately 1,375 cars, and a
portion of the south parking lot, of similar capacity,
were available for use. 257/
Concurrent with the start of phase one of the
move -- on the night of 18 September 1961 -- the
new headquarters telephone switchboard facility was
put into service. For a short time telephone opera-
tors were instructed to respond to all incoming calls
by saying, "Central Intelligence Agency" instead of
"Executive 3-6115." This change in procedure attracted
significant attention; extensive publicity was already
being given by the news media to the CIA relocation,
and this new departure from secrecy was rich grist
for the journalistic mills; the previous method of
answering calls was resumed after a few weeks. 258/
- 195 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
b1?,..V.,
By 13 November 1961 the move into the north
half of the building was completed, and by 15 May
1962 the entire move had been accomplished. Problems
of winter weather, security escorts, communications,
transportation, supplies and supply operations --
new modular furniture, rugs and drapes, and other
specially ordered equipment -- as well as the mail*
and courier distribution schemes, all had been over-
come to a large extent. 259/ Decorating and decor,
including both the planned sculptures for the main
entrance area and interior office and hall colors,
hangings, and the like, were a continuing problem
throughout the planning and construction phase. 260/
Heating, ventilating, and air conditioning systems
also presented problems. On 12 June 1962, however,
the DDS directed D/OL to inform Public Buildings
* Relocation Bulletin No. 33 was issued to clarify a
est
general misunderstanding in connection with mail distri-
buted to the new Agency building. Actually Langley is
the local name for a part of Fairfax County and has no
ami political or corporate identity. Some mail received
during this period Of time, which was addressed to
Langley, particularly when posted in the Washington
Metropolitan area, would be sent to McLean as the nearest
post office. The McLean postmaster reported, however,
that most "Langley Mail" went first to the Langley Air
Force Base at Hampton Roads, Virginia, and was then
forwarded to McLean. Bulletin No. 33 corrected the
problem.
- 196 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
0111
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Service, GSA, and have them take appropriate action
to correct the problems with minimum delay.* 261/
When the move was ?in its initial stages, the
presence of the DCI-to-be, John McCone, who was not
noted as a particularly patient or tactful individual,
provided an added fillip for the planners and movers.
Reportedly "very well pleased with the building" on
his first visit to the site, 263/ he began to throw
his weight around even before taking over as DCI.
Furniture had to be switched, he wanted to have a
closed circuit TV to the White House, he asked for
comparative construction costs with the new AEC and
State buildings, and he complained that the movers
were defacing the walls. 264/ The new DCI and his
staff moved to the new building on 29 November 1961,
the day he was sworn in. He occupied temporary
quarters on the third floor until the seventh-floor
suite was ready in the first week of March 1962.** 265/
* In October and November 1962, there were still com-
plaints about various items -- including air conditioning
-- that needed attention. 262/
** See Appendix 0.for a February 1962 description of
the new building, including the site and all major
facilities.
- 197 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
And
vri
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
bhij.K.V., 1
A minor crisis was reported on the day after McCone's
swearing in:
We [the DDS and John S. Earman, the Exec-
utive Of also had a considerable
discussion about transportation for the
old and the new Directors tomorrow, 30 No-
vember [1961]. This had been quite a
problem. I talked to Mr. Dulles and made
available the old Chrysler which he pre-
ferred to one of the Mercurys or other
cars. Unfortunately, as soon as the new
car was turned over to Mr. McCone, it broke
down and I understand that he was consider-
ably upset about it. We have done a lot of
telephoning.anA are trying to rush his new
Cadillac in from Detroit which [sic] I
hope will be available to him Sunday
afternoon or the first thing Monday morn-
ing.* 266/
The BPS Site Project Officer,
stated 25X1
in his monthly progress report for February 1962:
1. COMPLETION & EMPLOYEES
0.12 percent of the superstructure
contract was completed this month,
bringing completion to 98.68 percent
? against an estimated normal of 100
? percent. At the end of February
there were 175 employees on the build-
ing contract compared to 295 at the
end of January. All elevators, the
escalator, and dumb-waiters have been
accepted except four in Core B. The
* From his first day in office, McCone also was very
much concerned about the parking arrangements -- '
including the esthetics.thereof -- and the availability,
of parking space at Headquarters. 267/
- 198
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-n
ess.4
MOO
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
U.K. U.,
Otis Elevator Co. adjuster expected
all to be ready for service by
21 March 1962. It will be necessary
later to make these elevators avail-
able in order that they may be inte-
grated into four "programs": night,
morning rush hour, day, and evening
rush hour service.
2. SITE DEVELOPMENT
The planting of trees and land-
scaping is 85 percent completed.
The contractor, Greenbrier Farms,
Inc., has a work force of 12 men
on the project. Demolition of the
"Tomkins-Jones" two story office
building has started. The 13,200-
volt temporary line that fed the?
South half of the building was
removed and the road from the South
parking lot to the South-west en-
trance is now open to traffic. 268/
Summary and Conclusions
The A&E office at the building site was closed
on 2 February 1962; the auditorium roof tile instal-
lation was finally completed during May 1963; and the
final payment for architectural and engineering
services was made to H&A on 24 October 1963. 269/
The total construction time for the project, including
change orders, corrections, and omissions, was six
years and one month, from October 1957 to November
- 199 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R00030006noni_n
mei
mit
0,110
25X1
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SEURE.1.
1963.* At a total cost of about $43.7 million,**
? the Agency had acquired a new, modern building with
just over 1.3 million gross square feet (gsf) of
space, including som net square feet (nsf)
of "office-type" space. In the spring of 1963, the
new building housed nearly personnel, and at
that time office-type space averaged
per
person.*k* 270/ Less than ten years later, by
October 1972, office-type space had been reduced to
per person.**** 271/
* See Appendix P, Figures 14 through 38, for
photos of the Headquarters Building.
** Includes the cost for the Headquarters Building
construction, clearing, excavating, grading, roads,
utilities, powerhouse, parking lots (including the
first part of West lot), cafeteria, auditorium, and
fencing (security and property line).
*** This average excludes nsf of "special
use" and "storage" space and the personnel using
such space. These were presumably GSA, GSI, C&P
Telephone, and other service personnel.
**** The available office-type s ace was reduced
25)(9 from nsf in April 1963 to nsf occupied
by Agency personnel in October 1972. The
availability, of office-type space was reduced as
"other-type" space -- principally for computers and
other special use machines -- increased more than
fourfold over the 1963 figure.
- 200 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16 : CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
SECjii,..C., 1
In both 1963 and 1972, the average office
space per person in the Headquarters Building was
below that for personnel located in most of the other
principal buildings being occupied by Agency person-
nel in the Washington area.* By 1972 there were
even sharper distinctions between the average office
space available within and without the Headquarters
Building -- in the Rosslyn (Arlington, Virginia) area,
for example, the average nsf per person was
Ames Building,
in Key Building, and
in
in
Magazine Building. 272/'
On an unadjusted basis, estimates of the com-
parative cost per square foot (psf) for the construc-
tion of the new building were in keeping with costs
for the construction of both the Atomic Energy Com-
mission headquarters building and the new Department
of State' building - $19.75 per gsf for AEC, $23.04
per gsf. for New State, and $23.64 per gsf for the
CIA building. 273/ Adjusted estimates of the fore-
going costs indicated that since the AEC contract
- 201 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R0003onnsnnni_n
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
had been let in June 1956, construction costs had
risen 14 percent; and the adjusted price psf for
June 1959 (when the CIA contract was let) would have
been $22.72. Estimates of costs for the Agency
Headquarters Building, when adjusted downward to
exclude major site preparation and thus show a cost
'comparable to that for New State, resulted in a
figure of $20.64 psf. 274/_ Even though the final
cost per gross square foot for the Agency building
exceeded the estimate of $23664 per square feet --
the cost ran closer to $25.70 -- it .was estimated
that the.new facility would result in annual savings
in excess of $1 million that would otherwise have
been required for rental property. 275/
As mentioned earlier, the Congressional limi-
tation on the appropriation for the new bililding.
insured ihat additional space for housing Agency
personnel in: the Headquarters area would be a con-
tinuing problem. . In the spring of 1960, in fact,
the DDS
asked Jim Garrison and
to prepare as soon as possible a paper
which would clearly justify the need
for the auxiliary building. 276/
?
- 202 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
tweni
??^1
411111111
ardi
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
In any event, no additional appropriation was
forthcoming; and by the early spring of 1963, follow-
ing a year of sorting, shuffling, and adjustment to
the new building, there were at least
personnel
in the Washington area to be housed outside of the
Headquarters Building. They occupied 13 buildings
having a total area of about 430,000 nsf.* By October
1972 this number had reached persons employed
in. 19 buildings, with an area of approximately 1.3
million nsf. Among the other properties that were
25:0 leased for Agency use in the mid-1960,'s and/or early
1970's were the Ames, Key, MagaEine, and
buildings in Arlington County, Virginia**; and
25X1 the
25X1
in the
District of Columbia -- the building which houses
the National Photographic Interpretation Center --
mmo6 * This figure excludes space for the National Photo-
25)0 graphic Interpretation Center (NPIC).
sena
- 203 -
SECRET
?ked,Pa.
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
25X1
25X1
25X1
25X1
Secret
CIA Internal Use Only
Access Controlled by
CIA Historical Staff
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0
Secret
Approved For Release 2009/01/16: CIA-RDP90-00708R000300060001-0