NOTE FOR DIRECTOR'S BRIEFING BOOK

• Document Type: FOIA
• Collection: FOIA Collection
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 01482055
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 9
• Document Creation Date: December 28, 2022
• Document Release Date: August 7, 2017
• Case Number: F-2007-00094
• Publication Date: March 26, 1974

rr. r " -Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01482055
7 7
X
26 March 1974
MEMORANDUM FOR: Executive Secretary
SUBJECT : Note for Director's Briefing Book
The Inspector General on 26 March distributed guidelines
to the Deputies and Heads of Independent Offices for a search of
Agency files for Watergate-related material. (Copy attached)
.Uonald F. Chamberlain
Inspector General
Attachment a/ s
it di, it ai 1:4 t;
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01482055
ti.,,;01A 4.1.4 'A � AO
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01482055
1.2.2L j-
2 6 rf4R .1274
MEMORANDUM FOR: /Assistant to the Director
Executive Secretary
Deputy to the DCI for the Intelligence Community
Deputy to the DCI for National Intelligence Officers
Deputy Director for Operations
Deputy Director for Intelligence
Deputy Director for Management and Services
Deputy Director for Science and Technology
General Counsel
Legislative Counsel
Comptroller
SUBSECT : Watergate.- Agency File Review
1. This memorandum relates to the Director's request for a
rview of Agency files for material connected in any way with what
has come to be called "Watergate." At a recent morning meeting,
I mentioned that we were preparing guidelines to assist you in carrying
out the review within your areas of jurisdiction. The guidelines are
now completed, and a copy is attached hereto. The target date set
for completion of the review is 10 May 1974.
2. We have devoted much time to consideration of various
possible ways in which a review of Agency files might be conducted,
and we are convinced that a complete file review, regardless of how
conducted, would still not provide absolute assurance against future
IIsurprises." The guidelines we have prepared call for a somewhat
selective rather than a comprehensive review.
a. A simple cursory review of all files would likely be
of little substantive worth. It would enable the Agency to
state that all files have been reviewed; but such a statement
would only make more embarrassing any subsequent "discovery."
b. On the other hand, a thorough review of all Agency
files would require a truly massive effort extending over a
lengthy period of time, involving, hundreds of man-years. The
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01482055
7.1 :'"r- "
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01482055
term "Watergate" has come to cover to one extent or another
a wide range of topics, events, and personalities, including
much historical data. As the Watergate story has unfolded,
there has been instance after instance in which a seemingly
innocuous item has acquired relevance and significance because
of its relation to something else turned up in CIA or elsewhere.
For this reason alone, a complete review of all Agency hold-
ings today would not provide a guarantee against new "surprises"
tomorrow.
3. The file review which will be necessary in each of your areas
of responsibility, even though it can be described as a selective review,
will require a large amount of effort and time. It would be totally
beyond the abilities of my staff to do all the reviewing. Most of the
reviewing and most of the decision-making in connection with it will
have to be done in your components and under your management. I
and my staff will assist where we can. I suggest that you put some-
one in charge of the review effort in your area and have him make
arrangements with for a discussion
on "Watergate" and its various aspects and on what is expected in the
file review.
4. The guidelines which we have prepared are not as specific
as we would like to make them. �The fact is, however, that "Watergate"
does not have a precise definition.
5. It should be borne in mind that much information about the
Agency and Agency activities resides in the minds and memories of
Agency employees. Along with the file review, therefore, the memories
of Agency personnel must be jogged as part of the effort to ensure that
anything relevant which has not been reported previously be reported
now.
Donald F. Chamberlain
Inspector General
Attachment a/s
2 -
A
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01482055
kl 4
, Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01482055_
22 March 1974
WATERGATE - GUIDELINES FOR AGENCY FILE REVIEW
1. The Director has called for another review of Agency files
for material connected in any way with what has come to be called
"Watergate." The purpose of the review is to the extent possible
to ensure that Agency management is aware of all such material in
our files and that there will be no future "surprises" in this regard.
2. The review is to be conducted in accord with these general
guidelines, which have been prepared by the Inspector General.
3. The review within each directorate and separate operating
component will be the responsibility of that particular directorate
.or separate operating component, the role of the Office of the
Inspector General being limited to that indicated in the following
paragraphs. On the completion of the review within his area of
responsibility, each deputy director and chief of separate operating
component will certify in writing to the Inspector General that a
review has been conducted in. accord with these guidelines, and will
report to the Inspector General the findings of that review.
4. The target date for completion of the Agency file review
and the reports to the Inspector General is 10 May.1974. If a deputy
director or chief of separate operating component finds that he will
be unable to meet that target date, he will consult with the Inspector
General on the setting of a new target date for his component.
5. The review must be comprehensive. This does not mean
that each and every piece of paper under the Agency's control must
.be looked at and studied in this review. It does mean that all files,
including those in archives, in field offices, in proprietaries, and
anywhere else, must be considered. It will be up to the manage-
ment of each directorate or separate operating component to determine
what specific files must be physically searched and read, and what
files need not be so reviewed. For example, it should not be nec-
essary in this review to search anew through files which are known
to contain nothing but past issues of finished intelligence publications.
'111
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01482055
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01482055
In making this determination about any given set of files, however,
each management level must bear in mind that the term "Watergate"
has with the passage of time come to cover a wide range of topics,
events, and personalities, including much historical data. In para-
graph 8 below, is a list of subjects which are to be considered in
particular. This list has been prepared as a guide for the review.
It should not be used, however, as reason for excluding other
material which, while it may not come properly under any of the
headings given, may nonetheless be related to "Watergate" in the
broadest sense of the word.
6. Any material relevant to "Watergate" (in the sense indicated
above) found in component files will be forwarded to the Inspector
General. In some cases (e.g., if a given file or set of files is found
to contain significant quantities of relevant materials), a component
may find it desirable to segregate-certain files for review by rep- s
res'entatives of the Office of the Inspector General.
a, Whenever there is doubt as to whether something
should be forwarded to the Inspector- General or otherwise
called to his attention, the doubt should be resolved by for-
warding the material to or otherwise notifying the Inspector
General.
b. Any operationally sensitive material which require
special handling may be discussed directly with the Inspector
General.
7. The requirements of paragraph 6 above do not apply to
press clippings or to any material which has already been brought
to the attention of the Inspector General since the beginning of his
office's "Watergate" investigation, i.e. , since 14 May 1973.
8, Following is a list of subjects which must be considered
in this file review. As indicated above, this list is not necessarily
all-inclusive and should not be regard as such. The entire list
should be considered within all components, even though the file
search on some topics will be more narrowly targetted.
-2 -
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01482055
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01482055
,�������""
a. Watergate Break-in(s)
This heading covers the June 1972 surreptitious entry
into the Democratic National Headquarters at Watergate,
the subsequent arrests, and any and all information connect-�
ing the Agency in any way to preparations for the break-in(s)
in June 1972 or earlier, the individuals involved, and the
alleged cover-up efforts.
The "individuals involved?' includes but is not limited
to those listed in the attachment to 23 May 1973 Memorandum
for All Employees, "Agency Involvement in the Watergate
Case":
H. R. Haldeman
John Ehrlichman
John Dean
�
'Egli Krogh
David Young
E. Howard Hunt
G. Gordon Liddy
James W. McCord
John J. Caulfield
Bernard L. I3arker
Virgilio Gonzales
Frank Anthony Sturgis
b. Daniel Ellsber
This covers any and all information in Agency files
related to Ellsberg, including the requests for and
preparation of the profiles on Ellsberg, the case of the
so-called Pentagon Papers, damage assessments, Agency
associations, the Ellsberg trial.
3
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01482055
; ; " " "
l"-'�""'"Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01482055
c. Hank Greenspan
This covers any and all information in Agency files
reflecting any knowledge of the alleged break-in, or plans
for such, of the files of Hank Greenspan or of the newspaper
in Las Vegas with which he is associated.
d. Hunt's 1971 Request on Security Flaps
The review here will be limited, at least initially,
to a check of DDO European Division files and records,
if any, on the request of Howard Hunt in 1971 to a former
chief of European Division for information or background
on past security flaps, and on the response to the Hunt
request, specifically whatever. information may be available
about an alleged French security flap in 1954. The Inspector
General will consult directly with the Deputy Director for
Operations regarding the review on this subject.
e. Other Requests by Hunt
This covers any information available regarding any
requests by Hunt for Agency assistance on any matter
after his retirement from the Agency.
f. National Elections of 197 2
This covers any records that might reflect any Agency
knowledge, however obtained, reflecting activity related
to the national elections of 1972, including intelligence
support for candidates, security activity related in any
way to political conventions or other meetings, campaign
mail, support of other governmental organizations in
connection with the campaigns and the elections, and
political activities of any sort by Agency personnel beyond
that of a legal and clearly personal nature (e.g., personal
contributions to candidates).
g. Mexican Laundering
Initially at least, the review here will be limited to
a review of DDO files relating to operations in Mexico,
- 4 -
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01482055
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01482055.
a review of Miami/Cuba operational files, and a check and
possibly a file review in the Office of Finance. The time
frame for material on this subject will be calendar 1972.
The Inspector General will consult directly with the Deputy
Director for Operations and the Director of Finance with
regard to the review on this subject.
h. ITT
This covers any Agency association, however direct
or indirect, with ITT and its various components and sub-
sidiaries and affiliates; any records touching on ITT and
bearing on CIA/White House relations (including Congress-
ional hearings related to Chile); anything that might reflect
any Agency knowledge of the ITT role in connection with
the Republican National Convention in 1972.
1. . Robert R. Mullen and Company
This covers any and all information regarding Agency
association with Robert R. Mullen and Company, including
but not limited to the companyls provision of cover for
Agency personnel.
j. Howard Hughes
This covers any and all information connecting the
Agency or Agency personnel with Howard Hughes or any
of his enterprises.
k.
This covers any and all information connecting the
Agency or Agency personnel with or any of
his enterprises.
1, Robert Maheu
This covers any and all information connecting the Agency
or Agency personnel with Robert Maheu or any of his
enterprises.
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01482055
. Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01482055
m. Joint Op er ationS
The review here should cover joint FBI, NSA, or
Secret Service operations or activities which the Agency
or Agency personnel knew about, supported, or participated
iz in that might bear on or be related to the various aspects
of what is known as "Watergate, " including CIA support
11,r4
for Secret Service security activities in connection with
the 1972 national elections.
9. Questions regarding these guidelines or the review called
for may be referred directly to in the Office of
the Inspector General,
-6
-""
detl.` t�
4 -
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01482055