RETENTION OF FINANCE RECORDS IN ARCHIVES

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP84-00780R004200240003-9
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 8
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 22, 2006
• Sequence Number: 3
• Publication Date: November 19, 1971
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Release 2006/08/22 : CIA-RDP84-0078OR004200240003-9
Approved For Release 2006/08/22 : CIA-RDP84-0078OR004200240003-9
 Approved For Release 2006/08/22 : CIA-RDP84-0078OR004200240003-9
Luff
DDl S t.
19 November 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director for Support
SUBJECT: Retention of Finance Records in Archives
1. This has been a long and difficult problem to deal with.
As you know, the CI Staff has very properly, considering its general
responsibilities, highlighted the fact that the types of finance
records under discussion here (particularly travel' vouchers) have
at sometimes in the past been useful in contributing to counter-
intelligence analyses of difficult cases. I therefore had to take
into most serious account the position of the CI Staff.
2. After the most careful consideration, and noting your
statement that the Office of Security does not consider that such
records need be retained beyond twelve years, and noting further
the ruling of the Office of General Counsel that twelve year reten-
tion satisfies all legal requirements, I have decided to concur
in your proposal. I am doing this because of the severe space
limitations which I understand are operative in this matter and
also because I do not believe that the expenditures which would
be incurred year after year in a continuing sizable accumulation
of finance records would justify the occasional help such records
might provide in a given case. I know that this position has the
concurrence of the Director.
3. I would ask that, in going about the elimination of the
older records, an effort be made to take advantage of whatever
space flexibility there may be to keep such records beyond the
twelve year limit. In any event, I concur in the destruction of
such records older than twelve years, if space limitations so
dictate.
omae
Deputy Director for Plans
Approved For Release 2006/08/22: CIA-RDP84-00780R004200 40003-9
cc: C/ CI
 Approved For Release 2006/08/22 : CIA-RDP84-0078OR004200240003-9
ILLEGIB
6
'CO Next 6 Page(s) In Do(
Iq 041~
Approved For Release 2006/08/22 : CIA-RDP84-0078OR004200240003-9
 Approved For Release 2006/08/22 : CIA-RDP84-0078OR004200240003-9
CHRONOLOGY OF ACTION ON EFFORTS TO REDUCE RETENTION
PERIOD ON FINANCE RECORDS
1. October 1966 - Approximately 12 months of detailed staff work by
OF, OGC, and SSS resulted in: DCI memo (2 below).
2. 3 October 1967 - DCI formally requested Comptroller General approval
of a records retirement program for CIA financial records.
3. 2 November 1967 - Comptroller General of the U.S. approved records
retirement program for CIA financial records (12 years).
4. 29 March 1968 - Director of Finance memo to DDS requesting applica-
tion of 12 year retention period to vouchers (copies sent to OS
and DDP).
5. 22 April 1968 - On routing sheet. Director of Security (Osborne)
concurred in a .maximum retention period of twelve years, in
response to OF memo of 29 March 1968.
6. 8 May 1968 - Chief, CI memo to DDP urging retention of specified
Finance records for thirty years.
7. 10 May 1968 - On routing sheet DDP noted "concur with CI Staff
memo."
8. 4 October 1968 - OF in mem
discusses his meeting with Chief CI Staff in
another effort to obtain CI Staff's concurrence on 12 year reten-
tion. Unsuccessful.
9. 24 June 1970 - At urging of C/SSS and CIA RM0 STAT
DDP/RMO, again asked CI Staff RMO to reconsider tne
need to retain these records. rea irmed CI's desire to STAT
retain these records, stating that provisions of Angelton memo of
8 May 1968 still apply.
STAT
10. 25 August 1971 - DDS memo to DDP urging another review of issue
in view of news space allocation policy.
11. 17 September 1971 - Coffey, eeting. CI
requests more time to prepare DDP response to DD6 memo.
12. 14 October 1971 - DDP memo to DDS requesting more time (2 years)
for CI to "conduct a thorough investigation... and give me
definitive recommendation."
 Approved For Release 2006/08/22 : CIA-RDP84-0078OR004200240003-9
Approved For Release 2006/08/22 : CIA-RDP84-0078OR004200240003-9
 approved For Release 2006/08/22 : CIA-RDP84-00780R00420024QQ03-9~
2 2 OCT 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR: Assistant Deputy Director for Support
SUBJECT Response to the DD/P Memorandum on Finance
Records Retention Controversy
1. An analysis of the DDP's memorandum on the Finance records
problem leads me to conclude:
A. They have completely "begged" the questions and
issues listed in our memorandum of 25 August. We never
suggested or implied that the DDP be charged with storage
costs.
B. We said that if the DDP insists on retaining these
records they would be charged to the DDP space allocation
I land that to remain within their allocation they
might rind it necessary to convert these records to micro-
film. If that indeed was their only alternative, they would
have to provide manpower and funds to film these records.
C. The DDP's offer to pay to keep these records another
two years and to ask CI Staff to conduct a "thorough investi-
gation infersthat CI Staff needs another two, years to com-
plete their study; this is ridiculous and is an obvious
attempt to "wear us down".
D. A two year "breathing" spell might give CI an
opportunity to build a record of extensive references to
the collection. As you know, they are now hard-pressed to
demonstrate that they have used these old records. Finance
says there has. been no references within the past two years,
and claim there was very little if any reference prior to
that (OF can't confirm this because they destroyed their
schedules of reference activity over two years old).
2. I am confident you share my concern that the outcome of
this case will be a significant indicator on our capability to manage
the new policy of allocating spacel e will never find a better
case to present to the Executive Director if it should go that far). 25x1
EuNded tram
downgr?dIn; anj q
 proved For Release 2006/08/22 : CIA-RDP84-0078OR004200240003-9
SECRE U.
3. Per your suggestion, I d1prusged ttached response
informally (and off the record) wit Dick's candid
comments are:
A. We might cite more references to show that this
subject has been brewing for the past four years (attached
is a chronology for your information).
B. An alternative solution for DDP not mentioned in
our memo is for DDP to question the validity of the 1,000
foot allocation to DDP and seek Executive Director's
approval to release some of our contingency space to
accommodate the collection. Dick feels its just a question
of when, not if, the matter will be bucked to the Executive
Director.
C. He said the manpower needed to microfilm this collec-
tion would clearly preclude that avenue as a solution and he
was equally confident that the DDP could not identify off-
setting reductions.
In sum, Dick agreed that the attached is an appropriate response and
indicated that paragraph 3 was particularly important to bring to
the DD/P's attention.
4. There is obviously much more that could be said in our
reply, but I suggest the attached response be sent for openers. You
will note we have not asked for a response, nor have we suggested the
two year study by CI is a bit too long. This memo does put the ball
back in DDP's court for the time being. The real crunch will come
when we actually transfer space allocated to this collection to DDP
in March 1972 and as the traffic cop fo storage policy, decide
when and how to notify the Executive Director that DDP is way over
their allocation.
Chief, Support Services Staff
cxcludcd t.^:n aasemuth
d, ngrading and
? _ _, I- dasiassiffeaiiaa ~
 ,approved For Release 2006/08/22 : CIA-RDP84-0078OR004200240003-9
CHRONOLOGY OF ACTION ON EFFORTS TO REDUCE RETENTION
PERIOD ON FINANCE RECORDS
1. October 1966 - Approximately 12 months of detailed staff work by
OF, OGC, and SSS resulted in: DCI memo (2 below).
2. 3 October 1967 - DCI formally requested Comptroller General approval
of a records retirement program for CIA financial records.
3. 2 November 1967 - Comptroller General of the U.S. approved records
retirement program for CIA financial records (12 years).
4. 29 March 1968 - Director of Finance memo to DDS requesting applica-
tion of 12 year retention period to vouchers (copies sent to OS
and DDP).
5. 22 April 1968 - On routing sheet. Director of Security (Osborne)
concurred in a maximum retention period of twelve years, in
response to OF memo of 29 March 1968.
6. 8 May 1968 - Chief, CI memo to DDP urging retention of specified
Finance records for thirty years.
7. 10 May 1968 - On routing sheet DDP noted "concur with CI Staff
memo."
8. 4 October 1968 - OF in memo for record
discusses his meeting with Chief CI Staf in
another effort to obtain CI Staf s concurrence on 12 year reten-
tion. Unsuccessful.
9. 24 June 1970 - At urging of C/SSS STAY
DDP/RMO, again asked CI Staff to reconsider the
need to retain these records. reaffirmed CI's desire to STAY
retain these records, stating t at provisions of Angelton memo of
8 May 1968 still apply.
STAY
10. 25 August 1971 - DDS memo to DDP urging another review of issue
in view of new space allocation policy.
11. 17 September 1971 - Coffey, CI
requests more time to prepare DDP response to DD6 memo.
12. 14 October 1971 - DDP memo to DDS requesting more time (2 years)
for CI to "conduct a thorough investigation... and give me
definitive recommendation."