REGULATIONS FOR CERTAIN PROTECTIVE SERVICES

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP77M00144R001100190001-2
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 33
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: April 14, 2005
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: April 10, 1975
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144R00109012
REGULATIONS FOR CERTAIN PROTECTIVE SERVICES
HEARING
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
NINETY-FOURTH CONGRESS
H.R. 1244
TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES AND REGULATIONS FOR CER-
TAIN PROTECTIVE SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE UNITED
STATES SECRET SERVICE
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
61-044 WASHINGTON : 1076
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
JACK BROOKS, Texas, Chairman
L. H. FOUNTAIN, North Carolina
JOHN E. MOSS, California
DANTE B. FASCELL, Florida
TO RBE RT H. MACDONALD, Massachusetts
WILLIAM S. MOORHEAD, Pennsylvania
WM. J. RANDALL, Missouri
BENJAMIN S. ROSENTHAL, New York
JIM W RIGHT, Texas
FERNAND J. ST GERMAIN, Rhode Island
FLOYD V. HICKS, Washington
DON FUQUA, Florida
JOHN CONYERS, JR., Michigan
BELLA S. ABZUG, New York
JAMES V. STANTON, Ohio
LEO J. RYAN, California . .
JOHN L. BURTdN California
RICHARDSON PREYER, North Carolina
MICHAEL HARRINGTON, Massachusetts
ROBERT F. DRINAN, Massachusetts
EDWARD MEZVINSKY, Iowa
BARBARA JORDAN, Texas
GLENN ENGLISH, Oklahoma
ELLIOTT H. LEVITAS, Georgia
DAVID W. EVANS, Indiana
ANTHONY MOFFETT, Connecticut
ANDREW MAGUIRE, New Jersey
FRANK HORTON, New York
JOHN N. ERLENBORN, Illinois
JOHN W. WYDLER, New York
CLARENCE J. BROWN, Ohio
GILBERT GLIDE, Maryland
PAUL N. McCLOSKEY, JR., California
SAM STEIGER, Arizona
GARRY BROWN, Michigan
CHARLES THONE, Nebraska
ALAN STEELMAN, Texas
JOEL PRITCHARD, Washington
EDWIN B. FORSYTHE, New Jersey
ROBERT W. KASTEN, JR., Wisconsin
WILLIS D. GRADISON, JR., Ohio
WILLIAM M. JONES, General Counsel
JOHN E. MOORE, Staff Administrator
WILLIAM H. COPENHAVER, Associate Counsel
LYNNE HIGGINBOTHAM, Clerk
J. P. CARLSON, Minority Counsel
LEGISLATION AND NATIONAL SECURITY SUBCOMMITTEE
JACK BROOKS, Texas, Chairman
JOHN E. MOSS, California FRANK HORTON, New York
BENJAMIN S. ROSENTHAL, New York JOHN N. ERLENBORN, Illinois
JIM W RIGHT, Texas JOEL PRITCHARD, Washington
DON FUQUA, Florida
WILLIAM S. MOORHEAD, Pennsylvania
JAMES V. STANTON, Ohio
MICHAEL HARRINGTON, Massachusetts
ELMER W. HENDERSON, Staff Director
RICHARD C. BARNES, Professional Staff Member
CATHERINE KOEBERLEIN, Research Analyst
WANDA C. JOHNSON, Secretary
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
CONTENTS
Page
Hearing held on April 10, 1975---------------------------------------
1
Text of H.R. 1244-------------------------------------------------
2
Statement of-
Andrews, Robert T., Special Assistant to the General Counsel, Office
of the Secretary of Defense; accompanied by Col. Peter Kempf,
Military Assistant to the Special Assistant to the Secretary of De-
fense and Deputy Secretary of Defense-------------------------
15
Brooks, Hon. Jack, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Texas, and chairman, Legislation and National Security Subcom-
mittee: Opening statement------------------------------------
1
Keller, Robert F., Deputy Comptroller General of the United States;
accompanied by Irvine Crawford, Associate Director, General
Government Division----------------------------------------
9
Long, Francis A., Assistant Director, Administration, U.S. Secret
Service; accompanied by Clinton J. Hill, Assistant Director, Protec-
tive Forces--------------------------------------------------
Lett
t
t
t
t
itt
d f
h
b
13
ers, s
a
emen
s, e
c., su
m
e
or t
e record by-
Andrews Robert T., Special Assistant to the General Counsel, Office
of the Secretaryof Defense: Prepared statement------------------ 16-19
Keller, Robert F., Deputy Comptroller General of the United States:
Prepa.redstatement ------------------------------------------
9-11
APPENDIXES
Appendix 1-Correspondence and other material relative to the hearing-_
21
Appendix 2-H.R. 1244 as subsequently amended by the subcommittee----
25
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
REGULATIONS FOR CERTAIN PROTECTIVE SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
LEGISLATION AND NATIONAL SECURITY SUBCOMMITTEE
OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS,
Washington, D.C.
The subcommittee met, at 9:30 a.m., pursuant to notice, in room
2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jack Brooks (chairman
of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Jack Brooks, William S. Moorhead,
Benjamin S. Rosenthal, James V. Stanton, Frank Horton, and Joel
Pritchard,
Also present: Elmer W. Henderson, staff director; William B. Jones,
general counsel; and Warren B. Buhler and James L. McInerney,
minority professional staff, Committee on Government Operations.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN BROOKS
Mr. BROOKS. This meeting of the Subcommittee on Legislation and
National Security has been called to consider H.R. 1244, a bill intro-
duced by me to establish procedures and regulations for certain pro-
tective services provided by the U.S. Secret Service.
[The bill, H. R. 1244, follows:]
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: Cl -RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
V?TIY CONGRESS
H
1ST SESSIO*7
. R. 1244
IN THE HOUSE. OF REPRESENTATIVES
JANUARY 14, 1975
Mr. $roozs introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Com-
mittees on Gotiveriunent Operations and the Judiciary
A BILL
To establish procedures and regulations for! certain protective
services provided by the United States Secret Service.
1 .Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
.2 tives of the United Slates of America in Congress assembled,
3 That this Act may be cited as the "Presidential' Protection
4 Assistance Act of 1975".
5 SEC. 2. In performance of the protective duties of the
G United States Secret Service pursuant to section 3056 of
7 title 18 of the United States Code (pertaining to the protec-
8 ._tion of the President of the United States and other persons)
9 and the first section of the Act entitled "An Act to authorize
10 the United States Secret Service to furnish protection to
71 major presidential or vice presidential candidates", approved
I
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/1,4: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
n
1 June 6, 1968 (Public Law 90-331; 82 Stat. 170), Federal
2 departments and agencies shall assist the United States
3 Secret Service by-
4 (1) providing, with reimbursement, personnel,
5 equipment, or facilities on a temporary basis;
6 (2) providing, upon advance written request of
7 the Director of the United States Secret Service or his
8 authorized representative and upon reimbursement by
9 the United States Secret Service of actual costs, such
10 facilities, equipment, and services as are required by the
11 United States Secret Service to provide full=time s.ecu-
12 city for each protectee at no more than one property at
13 a time not in Government ownership or control, such
14 property having been designated by a President,
15 President-elect, former President, . or any other person
16 entitled to protection under the above provisions of law,
17 as the one property to be secured under this paragraph.
18 Where more than one family member is eligible for
19 Secret Service protection, there shall be only one such
20 designated property allowed per family. However, such
21 limitation shall not be construed to apply to members
22 of the immediate family who do not permanently reside
23 with the person entitled to protection;
24 (3) providing, upon advance written request of
25 the Director of the United States Secret Service or his
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
X authorized representative and upon reimbursement by
2 the :Secret Service of actual costs, such facilities, equip-
3 ment, and services, as are required by the United States
4 Secret Service to secure any other property not in Gov-
5 ernment ownership or control to the extent that such
6 expenditures do not cumulatively exceed $10,000 at any
7 one property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise
g utilized by persons entitled to protection under such
9 sections of title 18 and such Act unless approved' by
10 resolution-, adopted by the Committees on Appropria-
11 tions of the House and Senate, respectively.
12 SEC. 3. Expenditures by the United States Secret Service
13 for maintaining a permanent guard detail and for permanent
14 facilities, equipment, and services to secure non-Government
15 property- owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise utilized by
16 persons entitled to protection under the above provisions of
17 law shall be limited to properties described in section 2 (2)
18- of this Act.
19 SEC. 4. All purchases and contracts entered into pursu?-
20 ant to sections 2 (2), 2 (3), and 3 of this Act shall be made
21 in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Property
22 and Administrative Services Act of 1949.
23 SEC. 5.' o payments shall be made pursuant to this Act
24 for services, equipment, or facilities ordered, purchased,
leased, or otherwise procured by persons, other than officers
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/11: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
4
1 or employees of the Federal Government duly authorized by
2 the Director of the United States Secret Service to make such
3 procurements.
4 SEC. 6. All improvements and other items acquired pur-
5 suant-to this Act shall remain the property of the Federal
6 Government. Upon termination of entitlement to Secret Serv-
7 ice protection or if a President, President-elect, former Presi-
8 dent, or other person entitled to Protection under section
~9 3056 of title 18 of the United States Code and the first sec-
10 tion. of the Act entitled "An Act to authorize the United
11 States Secret Service to furnish protection to major Presi-
12 dential or Vice Presidential candidates", approved June 6,
1,3). 1968 (Public Law 90-331; 82 Stat. 170) designates a dif-
14 ferent property to lie so secured, alliniproveiacnts or other
15 items shall be removed from the original property unless it
.16 is economically unfeasible to do so, as determined by the.
17 United States Secret Service, except that, such improvements
18 or other items shall lie removed and the property restored
19 to its original state, regardless of the determination of- ecQ-
20 noniic mifeasibilit ,,if the owner of such property at the time
21 of determination requests removal. If improvements or other
21), items are not removed, the owner of the property at the time
2t of determination :shill cainpensat:e the Government for such
24 improvennciits or other items to the extent they have in-
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl44R001100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: FIA-RDP77M00l44R001100190001-2
5
Y cren,sed the fair market value of the property as Of the date
2 of transfer or termination.
3 SEC. 7. Expenditures under this Act shall lie from 'funds
4 specifically appropriated to the United States Secret Service
5 for carrying out the provisions of this Act. Public funds not
6 so appropriated shall not be used for the purpose of securing
7 any non-governmentally-o`vned property owned, leased, oc-
8 cupied, or otherwise utilized by persons entitled to protection
9 under section 3056 of title 18 of the United States Code and
10 the first section of the Act entitled "An Act to authorize the
11 United States Secret Service to furnish protection to major
12 presidential or vice presidential candidates", approved June
13 6, 1968 (Public Law 90-331 ; 82 Stat. 170).
14 SEC. 8. The United States Secret 'Service shall transmit
15 it detailed report of expenditures made pursuant to this Act
16 to the Committees on Appropriations and Committees on
17 Government Operations of the House of Representatives and
18 Senate on March 31 and September 30 of each year.
19 SEC. 9. Expenditures made pursuant to this Act shall be
20 subject to audit by the Comptroller General and his author-
21 ized representati~ es, who shall have access to all records
22 relatin, to such expenditures. The Comptroller. General shall
23 transmit a relrort of the results of any such audit to the C1orn-
24 mi.ttees ott Apiroprialions and Conunittez-; on Government
25 Operation. of the Rouse of Representatives and the Senate._
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00l44R001100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
6
1 SEC. 10. Section 2 of the Act entitled "An Aet -to author-
2 ize the United States Secret Service to furnish protection to
3 major presidential and. vice presidential candidates", approved
4 June 6, 1968 (Public Taw 90-331; 82 'Stoat. 170), is
5 repealed.
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: c lA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
Mr. BROOKS. This bill has been referred to our Committee on
Government Operations and to the Committee on the Judiciary by
the Speaker under the new rules adopted last fall. The Judiciary
Committee has reported the bill, with amendments, and its report
has been filed. It is now up to our committee to act on the legislation,
as we have been advised that it is necessary for both committees to
act before the bill can be considered on the floor of the House. It may
be well that we adopt the Judiciary Committee amendments so that
the two reported bills can go to the floor in identical form, if at all
possible.
H.R. 1244 is an outgrowth of an indepth study of expenditures of
Federal funds in support of Presidential properties by our Govern-
ment Activities Subcommittee in the last Congress. The report was
adopted by a full committee vote of 36 ayes, 0 nays, and 2 present.
This very committee found that $17 million in public funds was
spent on President Nixon's three privately owned properties; that
some items were paid for that were far in excess of security needs, or
were not related to security purposes, or were not procured by author-
ized Government personnel.
We also found a loss of fiscal responsibility due to the location of
authority among separate agencies; a failure by the Secret Service to
develop fundamental managerial controls over expenditures; that no
procedures were developed to handle Secret Service requests for
expenditures by GSA; that no limitation was placed on the number
of homes owned by a President which could be made secure, and that
inadequate consideration was given to apportioning costs between
the Federal Government and the private property owner.
In the last Congress I introduced legislation to carry out the recom-
mendations of this committee. That bill, similar to H.R. 1244, was
referred only to the Judiciary Committee. It passed the House by
voice vote on suspension, but there was not time for it to be acted
upon in the Senate.
H.R. 1244 sets certain conditions for the expenditures of funds for
the protection of the President and other persons and certain desig-
nated properties. You have in your folders a summary and it section-
by-section analysis.
Our witnesses today are representatives of the U.S. Secret Service,
the Department of Defense, and the General Accounting Office. I
hope that we can hear their testimony and, if time permits, go into
a markup of the bill.
I would call as the first witness our old friend, a very distinguished
and able Government employee and public servant, Bob Keller, the
Deputy Comptroller General, accompanied by Mr. Irvine Crawford,
the Associate Director of the General Government Division.
Mr. Keller, we have your statement. We would accept that for the
record or you can read it.
Congressman Horton?
Mr. HORTON. I would just like to indicate my support for this bill.
I do think we will have to make some technical changes. But I hope
we can go through the testimony quickly and then markup and report
the bill out.
This bill comes up under a different procedure. from what we have
had before in that II.R. 1244 was referred to two committees. This is
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14 9- CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
the first Congress that has allowed bills to be referred jointly to
two committees of the House.
The Judiciary Committee has already acted on the bill and our
committee is acting on it now.
I realize that to some extent this is repetitive but I think it is
important that we have the testimony and that our committee act
independently on it. Hopefully we can coordinate efforts between
our committee and the judiciary Committee and can get this legisla-
tion enacted quickly.
I do also want to take this opportunity to welcome my close,
personal friend of many years, Bob Keller. Bob and I worked together
very closely when I served on the Procurement Commission.
It is nice to have you, Bob, before the committee again.
STATEMENT OF ROBERT F. YELLER, DEPUTY COMPTROLLER GEN-
ERAL OF THE UNITED STATES; ACCOMPANIED BY IRVINE CRAW-
FORD, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, GENERAL GOVERNMENT DIVISION
Mr. KELLER. Thank you.
With your permission, I would. like to file for the record our com-
plete statement and in the interest of time I will highlight the
statement.
Mr. BROOKS. Without objection, the statement will be received for
the record. I particularly like the last paragraph.
Mr. KELLER. I will cover that, Mr. Chairman.
[Mr. Keller's prepared statement follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF ROBERT F. KELLER, DEPUTY COMPTROLLER GENERAL
OF THE UNITED STATES
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, we are glad to have an
opportunity to give you our views on It. R. 1244, a bill which, if enacted, would be
cited as the "Presidential Protection Assistance Act of 1975."
H.R. 1244 would spell out in some detail the circumstances under which pro-
tection may be furnished to the President and other persons entitled to protection
under 18 U.S.C. 3056, and section 1 of the Act of June 6, 1968, Public Law 90-331,
particularly with respect to security expenditures on property which is not owned
by the Government. It would also revise the manner in which protective work by
the Federal departments and agencies is funded.
H.R. 1244 is an outgrowth of the controversy over expenditures at President
Nixon 's residences at San Clemente and Key Biscayne and to a lesser extent, at
other locations. As the controversy grew, GAO began to receive letters from
Members of Congress, some asking for information and others calling for an
investigation. These letters expressed a common concern about the magnitude of
the total reported expenditures and, with respect to specific expenditures, ques-
tioned whether the work performed:
Related to protection of the. President;
Provided a nonprotective benefit to the President.
Many letters also expressed an interest in expenditures made at the residences
of past Presidents.
In response, GAO made a review of the expenditures for protective purposes at
Key Biscayne and San Clemente, noting expenditures for other purposes when
appropriate. GAO also gathered information on expenditures at the residences of
several past Presidents. Our findings were included in a report to the Congress
dated December 18, 1973.
As you know a parallel inquiry was conducted by the Government Activities
Subcommittee of the House Committee on Government Operations. A report of
the full Committee on that inquiry was transmitted to the Speaker on May
20, 1974.
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/1410CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
Although the report made by the Comptroller General was intended to answer
the primary questions being asked about the protective measures at Key Biscayne
and San Clemente, we took the occasion to also review the experience of 1968-
1973 in terms of budgeting, accounting, and auditing with a view to identifying
what had been done or still needed to be done to strengthEn control by the Con-
gress and promote understanding by the public.
We observed that after the enactment of Public Law 90-331 of June 6, 1968,
which, in addition to authorizing protection of presidential and vice presidential
candidates, required Federal departments and agencies to furnish assistance to
the Secret Service upon request, the Secret Service began to draw heavily on
GSA appropriations in order to carry out Secret Service protective functions. This
arrangement had the following weaknesses:
-GSA funds were not directly associated with Secret Service protective activi-
ties during the budget preparation and review process.
-A casualattitude in authorizing work was fostered. Because most requests
were verbal, who made requests or precisely what was requested could not be
readily determined.
-GSA was invited to do more than simply execute Secret Service requests,
particularly when requests are vague or general.
On the basis of the foregoing we made several recommend?ttions to the Congress,
which I will discuss briefly and relate them generally to H.R. 1244 where appro-
priate.
First, we recommended that appropriations for expenditures at private resi-
dences for protective purposes be made to the Secret Service and no other funds be
available for that purpose. In this respect, changes made in the financing of GSA
public buildings activities by the Public Buildings Act Amendments of 1972 now
require that the Secret Service obtain appropriations and reimburse GSA for
protective assistance. However, this does not deal with the entire problem because
it does not take care of expenditures by agencies not under GSA control, such as
by the military. H.R. 1244 addresses this problem, by providing that expenditures
for securing any nongovernmentally owned property shall only be from funds
specifically appropriated to the Secret Service (Section 7), except that temporary
assistance may be given by the Department of Defense and the Coast Guard
without reimbursement in providing protection to the President or Vice Presi-
dent. (Section 2(1).)
Second, we recommended that the accounting system of the Secret Service
require that expenditures at private residences for protective purposes be author-
ized by the Director or Deputy Director of the Service. B.R. 1244 provides that
advance written request of the Director or his authorized representative is re-
quired to obtain assistance in making secure property not in Government owner-
ship. (Sections 2(2), 2(3), and 5.)
Third, we recommended that the Secret Service make are annual public report to
the Congress showing in as much detail as security will allow expenditures made
on private residences for protective purposes. Section 8 of H.R. 1244 provides
that Secret Service, the Department of Defense, and the Coast Guard shall
transmit a detailed report of expenditures under the Act to the Committees on
Appropriations, the Committees on the Judiciary, and the Committees on Govern-
ment Operations on March 31 and September 30 of each year.
Fourth we recommended that the report made by the Secret Service should be
subject to audit by GAO and GAO should be given complete access to all records.
files, and documents supporting expenditures made by the Service. Section 9 of
H.R. 1244 takes care of this recommendation.
In addition, we suggested that Congress may wish :~o consider limiting the
number of private residences at which permanent protective facilities will be
provided for a President and others entitled to protection, and that consideration
should be given to the desirability of a Government-owned residence in Washing-
ton for the Vice President. As you know, Public Law 93-346, enacted July 12, 1974,
designated the premises occupied by the Chief of Naval Operations as the official
residence of the Vice President. Regarding a limit on the number of residences at
which permanent protective facilities will he provided for a President, we believe
that the provisions of section 2(2) which provides that only one designated
property not in Government ownership or control at any one time may be given
full time security protection, and the provisions of section 2(3) which limits the
protection of other property to $10,000 at any one property unless a higher amount
is approved by the Appropriations Committees takes care of this recommendation.
While we did not make a recommendation in our report concerning the disposal
of improvements and other items placed on private property for protective pur-
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/1k: CIA-RDP77M00144R001.100190001-2
poses we are in favor of Section 6 of II.R. 1244 which provides that (1) all such
improvements and other items shall remain the property of the Government;
(2) upon termination of protection the improvements and other items shall be
removed unless it is economically unfeasible to do so, or if the property owner
insists on removal; and (3) if improvements and other items are not removed
then the property owner shall compensate the Government for such improve-
ments and other items.
We believe that H.R. 1244, as amended by the House Judiciary Committee,
will do a great deal to prevent the situations disclosed in the report of this Com-
mittee last year and in the report of the Comptroller General. We recommend its
favorable consideration.
Mr. KELLER. At the same time the Government Activities Sub-
committee of the House Government Operations Committee was
making an inquiry into Key Biscayne and San Clemente, the General
Accounting Office was also making an inquiry. There were parallel
inquiries but our study was primarily devoted to the budgeting,
accounting, and auditing which took place in connection with protec-
tive expenditures at San Clemente and Key Biscayne.
In summary, we found that after enactment of Public Law 90-331
of June 6, 1968, which authorized the Secret Service to call on any
agency of the Federal Government to furnish assistance in connection
with protective services, the Service began to draw heavily, partic-
ularly on GSA appropriations, in order to carry out the Secret Service
protective functions. We felt this arrangement had the following
weaknesses :
-GSA funds were not directly associated with Secret Service pro-
tective activities during the budget preparation and review
process.
-A casual attitude in authorizing work was fostered. Because most
requests were verbal, who made requests or precisely what was
requested could not be readily determined.
-GSA was invited to do more than simply execute Secret Service
requests, particularly when requests are vague or general.
On the basis of our general findings, and I might add, Mr. Chair-
man, our report is in much more complete detail with examples, we
made the following recommendations in a report which we filed on
December 18, 1973:
First, we recommended that appropriations for expenditures at
private residences for protective purposes be made to the Secret Serv-
ice and no other funds be available for that purpose. In this respect,
changes made in the financing of GSA public buildings activities by
the Public Buildings Act Amendments of 1972 now require that the
Secret Service obtain appropriations and reimburse GSA for protec-
tive assistance. However, this does not deal with the entire problem
because it does not take care of expenditures by agencies not under
GSA control, such as by the military.
H.R. 1244 addresses this problem by providing that expenditures
for securing any nongovernmentally owned property shall only be
from funds specifically appropriated to the Secret Service, section 7;
except that temporary assistance may be given by the Department of
Defense and the Coast Guard without reimbursement in providing
protection to the President or Vice President, section 2(1). The
latter is an amendment made by the House Judiciary Committee in
its recent action.
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00l44R001100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: 5JA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
Second, we recommended that the accounting system of the Secret
Service require that expenditures at private residences for protective
purposes be authorized by the Director or Deputy Director of the
Service. H.R. 1244 provides that advance written request of the
Director or his authorized representative is required to obtain assist-
ance in making secure property not in Government ownership-
sections 2(2), 2(3), and 5.
Third, we recommended that the Secret Service make an annual
public report to the Congress showing in as much detail as security
will allow expenditures made on private residences for protective
purposes. Section 8 of H.R. 1244 provides that the Secret Service,
the Department of Defense, and the Coast Guard shall transmit a
detailed report of expenditures under the act to the Committees on
Appropriations, the Committees on the Judiciary, and the Commit-
tees on Government Operations on March 31 and September 30 of
each year.
Fourth, we recommended that the report made by the Secret Service
should be subject to audit by GAO and GAO :mould be given com-
plete access to all records, files, and documents supporting expenditures
made by the Service. Section 9 of H. R. 1244 takes care of this recom-
mendation.
In addition, we suggested that Congress may wish to consider
limiting the number of private residences at which permanent pro-
tective facilities will be provided for a President and others entitled
to protection, and that consideration should be given to the desirability
of a Government-owned residence in Washington for the Vice
President.
As you know, Public Law 93-346, enacted July 12, 1974, designated
the premises occupied by the Chief of Naval Operations as the official
residence of the Vice President.
Regarding a limit on the number of residences at which permanent
protective facilities will be provided for a President, we believe that
the provisions of section 2(2), which provides that only one designated
property not in Government ownership or control at any one time
may be given full-time security protection, and the provisions of
section 2(3), which; limits the protection of other 'property to $10,000
at any one property unless a higher amount is approved by the Appro-
priations Committees, takes care of this recommendation.
While we did not make a recommendation in our report concerning
the disposal of improvements and other items placed on private
property for protective purposes, we are in favor of section 6 of H.R.
1244 which provides that: (1) All such improvements and other items
shall remain the property of the Government; (2) upon termination
of protection the improvements and other items shall be removed
unless it is economically unfeasible to do so, or if the property owner
insists on removal; and (3) if improvements and. other items are not
removed then the property owner shall compensate the Government
for such improvements and other items.
We believe that H.R. 1244, as amended by the House Judiciary
Committee will do a great deal to prevent the situations disclosed in
the report of this committee last year and in the report of the Comp-
troller General. We recommend its favorable consideration.
That concludes my statement, Mr. Chairman. I shall be glad to
respond to any questions.
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/11 : CIA-RDP77M00144R001100190001-2
Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Keller, I want to thank you for a fine presentation,
and Mr. Crawford, I thank you for your appearance here today. I
think your statement is very clear and that nothing would be served
by rehashing it.
Thank you very much.
Mr. HORTON. I have no questions.
Mr. KELLER. Thank you.
Mr. BROOKS. Thank you for coming down.
Next we shall ask Mr. Long of the Secret Service, to come forward.
He is accompanied by Mr. Hill, the Assistant Director, Protective
Forces.
Mr. Long, we are delighted to have you here. I believe we have a
copy of your statement. If you would proceed we would be pleased to
hear you.
STATEMENT OF FRANCIS A. LONG, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, ADMINIS-
TRATION, U.S. SECRET SERVICE; ACCOMPANIED BY CLINTON 7.
HILL, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, PROTECTIVE FORCES
Mr. LONG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am pleased to appear before you and the other distinguished
members of this committee to comment on the provisions of H. R.
1244, as amended. The purpose of the bill is "to establish procedures
and regulations for certain protective services provided by the United
States Secret Service."
As you know, historically, the Secret Service has from time to
time called upon other Government agencies to assist it in carrying
out its protective responsibilities. The Congress has recognized this
need by providing express statutory provisions for this practice.
The bill before you today, H.R. 1244, as amended, expands upon
existing practices and statutes by placing limitations on the number
of residences that could be permanently protected and, at the same
time, in some instances, requires that the Secret Service reimburse
other agencies who assist the Service in carrying out its protective
resThonsibilities.
The procedures by which the Secret Service has obtained the assist-
ance of other agencies were studied very thoroughly by the General
Accounting Office, and a number of recommendations were made to
the Congress. Most of these recommendations already have been
implemented by the Secret Service, including the establishment of
comprehensive written procedures for the acquisition of space,
alterations, and services at locations involving protective operations.
Essentially, the issues raised by the General Accounting Office
that have not yet been addressed are those matters such as the limita-
tion on the number of residences that may be provided permanent
protection and the provision for reimbursements to other agencies,
which will require the action of the Congress. In this regard, we would
appreciate the opportunity to work with members of the committee
staff to clarify some technical points in the existing language of
H. R. 1244, as amended.
Due to the exigencies of the situation, time did not permit clear-
ance of this statement with the Office of Management and Budget.
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00l44R001100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: f4A-RDP77M00144R001100190001-2
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my remarks, and I shall now be glad
to answer any questions you or the other members of the committee
may have.
Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Long, I appreciate your comments. I would say
just in general, then, that it is your conclusion that the bill would be
workable.
Mr. LONG. I see no impediment to the working of the bill. There
are some items which would require clarification, but in the event
we do not have an opportunity to clarify them with the committee
staff we would submit written requests to the Comptroller General
for decision.
Mr. BROOKS. Fine.
Mr. LONG. This is primarily in the following area-in many instances
we request assistance from other agencies where it seems to us there
is a responsibility to perform, anyway. There has to be some delinea-
tion of what an agency has to do under its own charter as opposed to
what it does to assist the Secret Service. I do not believe these to be
insurmountable problems.
Mr. BROOKS. What people are you required to protect and for
how long under title 18, United States Code 3050?
Mr. HILL. Under title 18, section 3056, the President and his
immediate family; the President-elect; the Vice President and his
immediate family; the Vice President-elect; major candidates for the
Offices of President or Vice President; heads offoreign governments,
chiefs of state, other distinguished foreign visitors to the United
States; former Presidents and their wives; widows of former Presidents
until her death or remarriage; minor children of former Presidents
until they reach the age of 16; and Americans on official missions
abroad at the direction of the President.
Mr. BROOKS. And officer next in succession to the President?
Mr. HILL. That is right.
Mr. HORTON. This bill does not change any of that jurisdiction.
We do not touch on the matter of coverage of the Secret Service in
this respect.
Mr. HILL. That is correct
Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Long, you do interpret the bill to give you
temporary authority to do anything that is necessary to protect
any of these protectees?
Mr. LONG. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. BROOKS. That is the intent of the bill and that is the way you
interpret it and understand it?
Mr. LONG. Yes, we interpret it that way.
Mr. BROOKS. You might argue a little about who paid for it, but
there is no hesitancy on the part of the Secret Service in doing im-
mediately what is necessary.
Mr. LONG. There is one section, section 2(1), where the word
"may" is used for services provided by the Defense Department,
which seems to indicate there might be some discretion on their part.
Mr. BROOKS. We have discussed that at some detail with both the
Republicans and Democrats. It is my understanding that the minority
counsel discussed with you that language.
Mr. LONG. That is right.
Mr. BROOKS. And that you were happy to see that it might be
changed to "shall" from "may."
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/145 CIA-RDP77M00144R001100190001-2
Mr. LONG. That is correct, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. BROOKS. That will be done, I anticipate.
Are there other questions of Mr. Long, gentlemen?
Mr. ROSENTHAL. I have nothing.
Mr. PRITCHARD. I have nothing.
Mr. BROOKS. If there are no questions I thank both of you for
being here. We appreciate your cooperation and hope we can get this
implemented shortly.
Mr. LONG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. BROOKS. From the Department of Defense we have
Mr. Robert T. Andrews, Special Assistant to the General Counsel,
Office of the Secretary of Defense; and Col. Peter Kempf, Military
Assistant to the Special Assistant to the Secretary and Deputy
Secretary of Defense.
Mr. Andrews, I would hope that you could summarize your very
excellent statement rather than read it. Certainly. we shall include
a copy of the splendid letter that you and your colleague, Mr. Hoffman,
have graciously submitted to the Judiciary Committee earlier this
year.
[See app. 1, p. 21.1
STATEMENT OF ROBERT T. ANDREWS, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE
GENERAL COUNSEL, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE;
ACCOMPANIED BY COL. PETER KEMPF, MILITARY ASSISTANT TO
THE SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE AND
DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
Mr. ANDREWS. Thank you, sir.
H.R. 1244 has three provisions which are of interest and importance
to the Defense Department. They are sections 2(1), which calls for
general reimbursement by the Secret Service to the Department of
Defense.
The second provision is section 8 which calls for us to transmit a
detailed report of expenditures.
Section 10 repeals section 2, Public Law 90-331.
As the House Judiciary Committee report noted, "The provisions
of this bill are intended to dive force to the principle that fiscal account-
ability for public expenditures should reside in the agency having
the authority to obligate those expenditures." We support this
principle and we support the bill in its modified form.
Historically, I might review briefly the relationships between the
Defense Department and the Secret Service. Since 1968 we have
been operating under an agreement whereby we do provide logistical
and other support to the Secret Service in the performance of its
mission. However, that agreement did not provide for reimbursement
but was, in fact, silent.
H.R. 1244 would now make it plain that reimbursement is intended.
In the past, as we have noted, the Secret Service has denied any
responsibility to reimburse us except for operational costs of aircraft
furnished to the Secret Service.
Under the bill now before you the Defense Department would be
reimbursed for all the categories of persons eligible for protection.
We feel that this provision is consistent with the Department's
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00l44R001100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14 FIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
general policy of requiring any other Federal agency to which support
is provided to reimburse for the costs incurred. This provision has
been in effect the Economy Act for many years, and we have operated
under that act in our relations with many other departments and
agencies of the Government.
I think in our submissions we have made plain what costs are
considered incremental costs and what costs are not.
Attached to our statement is a list of kinds of services rendered to
the Secret Service during the 1972 Presidential campaign pursuant to
Public Law 90-331. Also included are the costs incurred in providing
explosive ordnance disposal services to the Secret Service in 1973 and
1974, exclusive of that provided directly to the President and Vice
President. These precedents establish that the costs are identifiable
and that there is an accounting method whereby the Congress and the
public may learn the true facts.
We believe that with the provisions of the bill, in its amended form,
the Defense Department can move forward and work out suitable
arrangements with the Secret Service.
That concludes my statement, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Andrews, I want to thank you for a very fine and
definitive statement which I think reflects the Defense Department's
and my own keen interest in efficient management.
I have only a couple questions. Do you anticipate any difficulty in
preparing the reports to Congress which this bill requires?
Mr. ANDREWS. We would find no difficulty.
Mr. BROOKS. You keep up with what you spend pretty well?
Mr. ANDREWS. Yes, Mr. Chairman. We have a very elaborate
accounting sy stem.
Mr. BROOKS. I want to thank you and Colonel Kempf for your
appearance and y our time here. Please convey my deep appreciation
to Mr. Hoffman for his keen appreciation of this matter.
Mr. ANDREWS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. BROOKS. And the Secretary, Mr. Schlesinger.
Mr. ANDREWS. I shall do so.
Mr. BROOKS. Questions, gentlemen?
[No response.]
Mr. BROOKS. If not, thank you again.
The hearing is adjourned.
[Mr. Andrews' prepared statement follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF ROBERT T. ANDREWS, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE
GENERAL COUNSEL, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, the Department of De-
fense appreciates your invitation to appear before the Subcommittee on Legisla-
tion and National Security to present its views on H.R. 1244 and on the amend-
ments adopted by the House Judiciary Committee. Accompanying me is Colonel
Peter Kempf, United States Air Force, who is assigned to the Office of the Secre-
tary of Defense. In that capacity he oversees the employment of Department of
Defense resources in support of & United States Secret Service.
H.R. 1244
H.R. 1244 establishes procedures and regulations for certain protective serv-
ices provided by the United States Secret Service. While a number of its pro-
visions relate to matters outside the jurisdiction of the Defense Department there
are three provisions which have an immediate effect on the DoD-Secret ervice
arrangements for protective support. The first is Section 2(1) which provides that
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/1417CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
the Secret Service shall reimburse the Department of Defense and the Coast Guard
for protective services rendered, subject to certain exceptions. The second pro-
vision is Section 8 which requires the Department of Defense to transmit a de-
tailed report of expenditures made pursuant to this Bill. The third provision is
Section 10 which repeals Section 2 of Public Law 90-331 relating to assistance pro-
vided the Secret Service by other Departments and Agencies.
The Department of Defense supports the objectives of the Bill, specifically the
provisions noted above. As the House Judiciary Report 94-105 noted, "The
provisions of this Bill are intended to give force to the principle that fiscal ac-
countability for public expenditures should reside in the agency having the author-
ity to obligate those expenditures."
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-DEPARTMENT 01'THE TREASURY AGREEMENT
On June 6, 1968, Congress enacted Public Law 90-331, "Joint Resolution-To
Authorize the United States Secret Service to Furnish Protection to Major Presi-
dential or Vice Presidential Candidates." Section 2 of that law requires Federal
Departments and Agencies to assist the Secret Service in the performance of its
protective duties under Section 18 U.S.C. 3056 and in the performance of its
duties to protect major Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates under
Section 1 of that Act.
In recognition of these responsibilities, the Secretary of Defense and the Secre-
tary of the Treasury entered into an agreement on June 11, 1968, for the purpose
of providing procedures and delineating in more specific terms the logistical assist-
ance and other support the Department of Defense will provide to the Secret
Service. On July 15, 1968 the Department of Defense issued Department of De-
fense Directive 3025.13, "Employment of Department of Defense Resources in
Support of the United States Secret Service." Neither the Defense-Treasury
Agreement nor the Defense Directive address whether or not reimbursement would
be required. The result was that Defense periodically submitted requests to the
Secret Service for reimbursement for facilities, equipment and services rendered to
the Secret Service. As it general rule, Secret Service denied any responsibility to
reimburse, although on occasion it did pay the operational costs of aircraft furnish-
ed to the Secret Service.
H.R. 1244 makes plain that reimbursement is intended as it general rule. It
would also require Secret Service to make a detailed report of these expenditures
to the Committees named in the Bill. It would likewise require the Department of
Defense to submit a detailed report of its expenditures except when the support is
provided to the President or the Vice President under the exception clause of
Section 2(1).
It may be useful at this point to describe the categories of persons who are
subject to Secret Service protection. For ease of description, I will divide the list of
persons eligible for protection into four categories:
The first category includes the President and his immediate family, the
President-elect, the Vice President and his immediate family and the Vice-
, President-elect.
The second category consists of the former President and his. wife, the
widow of a former President and the minor children of a former President.
The third category of persons eligible for protection is the visiting heads of
foreign states, other distinguished foreign visitors to the United States and
official United States representatives performing missions abroad.
The fourth category of persons qualifying for protection is major Presi-
dential and Vice Presidential candidates as determined by the Advisory
Committee established by Section 1 of Public Law 90-331.
EFFECT OF REIMDURSEMEN'.r PROVISION
H.R. 1244 provides that the Secret Service will reimburse the Department of
Defense for all protective services rendered to categories one through four, except
when the protection is provided the President or Vice President, and then only
under the circumstances to be described hereafter. This provision is consistent
with the Department's general policy of requiring any other Federal agency to
which support is provided to reimburse for the costs incurred. The statutory
authority for this policy is 31 U.S.C. 686, the so-called Economy Act, under which
Defense makes available its unique capabilities to the remainder of the Federal
Government when it is determined to be in the national interest and beneficial to
overall governmental economy.
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/141clA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
The Department seeks reimbursement only for incremental costs, i.e., the costs
over and above the costs to the Department for maintaining a given capability in
support of its military mission. The reimbursement cost would not include military
salaries, purchase of military equipment or other costs normally incurred in the
operation of the Military Departments. It would include, for example, incremental
aircraft operation and maintenance costs, rental cars, the services of explosive
ordnance disposal personnel, and other specialized services in direct support of
the Secret Service.
It should be emphasized that incremental costs are in most cases readily identi-
fiable. Attachment A to this statement lists the kinds of services rendered to the
Secret Service during the 1972 Presidential campaign pursuant to Public Law 90-
331. Attachment B lists the costs incurred in providing explosive ordnance dis-
posal services to the Secret Service in 1973 and 1974, exclusive of that provided
directly to the President and Vice President.
The Department of Defense does not consider the reach of H.R. 1244, as modi-
fied by the Judiciary Committee, to extend to those services that the Department
provides directly to the President as Commander-in-Chief. In that role, the
President looks to the Department of Defense to provide him necessary equip-
ment, services and facilities to fulfill certain of his national security responsibilities.
These include communications, aircraft, personnel and certain types of physical
security devices. These are provided directly to the President, not the Secret
Service, even though the Secret Service may exercise a degree of operational con-
trol. These services are considered to be appropriate Defense Department ex-
penditures, unlike support provided to the Secret Service for other of its protectees.
This rationale also applies to the Vice President as the primary Presidential suc-
cessor. Accordingly, if the temporary support is provided directly to the President
or Vice President and that support is incidentally assisting, it isexempt from the
requirement for reimbursement.
The mechanics of properly accounting for support provided other agencies are
rather simple and straightforward. As noted earlier, the chargeable costs are in-
cremental and in a majority of cases clearly evident, such as rental cars, aircraft
support fora non-military mission, etc. In those few cases where there may be some
doubt as to the proper division of costs, they are negotiated with the agency
concerned. To date, except for the Secret Service, there have been no situations
that could not be resolved. With the reimbursement provision language now
proposed by the House Judiciary Committee, the Department of Defense antici-
pates no difficulty in reaching accord with the Secret Service as to the proper
division of costs.
In summary, the Department of Defense supports the objectives of H.R. 1244
as being consistent with sound management and fiscal policy. Should the Commit-
tee have any questions or require any additional information for the record,
Colonel Kempf and I would be pleased to respond.
[ATTACHMENT Al
PRESIDENTIAL AND VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES DURING ELECTION YEAR PERIOD, JANUARY-NOVEMBER 1972
Category I:
Military labor:
Personnel services______________________ $571,806 $43,291 $156,244 $46,099 $827,440
Subsistence and quarters____________________________ 2,600 102 ------------ 2,702
Aircraft operations---------------------------------- 907 ----- -------------- 907
Motor vehicle transportation_________________________91 ------------ 91
Subtotal_____________________________ 571,806 46,798 166,437 46,099 831,140
Category II:
Incremental costs:
Personnel services__________________________________ 1,068 3,302 12,527 16,897
Subsistence and quarters_________________ 270 ---- ----------------- 270
Travel_________________________________ 614,107 6,557 333,112 44,997 998,773
Transportation ofthings ----------------- 1,029 ------------ 404 ------------ 1, 433
Aircraft operations______________________ 79,380 8,022 ------------------------ 87, 402
Motor vehicle transportation______________________________________ 3, 003 41,933 44,936
Consumable material--------------------- 4,276 ------------ 798 5,420 10,494
Investment equipment------------------------------------------- 229 -------- -- 229
Communications------------------------------------------------ 1,497 237,504 239,001
Clothing allowances_____________________ 25,414 ------------ 4,100 ------------ 29,514
Other (toll calls and generator, room and
trailer rentals]________________________ 153 272 1,350 ------------- 1,775
Subtotal___________________________ 724,359 16,189 347,795 342,381 1,430,724
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/11: CIA-RDP77M00144R001100190001-2
[ATTACHMENT A]-Continued
PRESIDENTIAL AND VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES DURING ELECTION YEAR PERIOD, JANUARY-
NOVEMBER 1972-Continued
Category III:
Total costs:
Personnel services______________________
$571,806
$44,359
$169,546 $58,626
$844,337
Subsistence and quarters -----------------------------
2,870
102 ------------
2,972
Travel_________________________________
614,107
6,557
333,112 44,997
998,773
Transportation of things_________________
1,029
------------
404 ------------
1,433
Aircraft operations______________________
79,380
8,929
------------------------
88,309
Motor vehicle transportation______________________________________
3,094 41,933
45,027
Consumable material____________________ 4,276 ------------
798 5,420
10,494
Investment equipment___________________________________________
229 ------------
229
Communications________________________________________________
1,497 237,504
239,001
Clothing allowances_____________________ 25,414 ------------
4,100 ------------
29,514
Other (toll calls and generator, room and
trailer rentais5---------------------- __ 153 272
1,35D ------------
1,775
Note: Category 11 expenses are those items which the Department of Defense considers as reimbursable (see
statement).
(ATTACHMENT B]
U.S. ARMY1 INCREMENTAL EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE DISPOSAL (EOD) COSTS
Military District of Washington__________________________________________________________________ $1,282
Force command------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17,094
Health service-------------------------------------------------------------------- $3,050 --------------
Training and doctrine command ------------------- ---------------------- 446,823 --------------
I These figures are illustrative of our ability to break out detailed incremental costs and do not represent the total DOD
costs in support of the U.S.S.S. These figures represent only expenditures within the continental United States,
[Whereupon, at 9:50 a.m., the subcommittee adjourned, to recon-
vene subject to the call of the Chair.]
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00l44R001100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
APPENDIXES
APPENDIX 1.-CORRESPONDENCE AND OTHER MATERIAL RELATIVE
TO THE IIEARING
GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE, DEPARTMENT OP DEFENSE,
lIon. PETER W. RODINO, Jr.,
Chairman, House Judiciary Committee,
House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in response to concerns regarding II.R. 1244
raised by the Committee staff.
II.R. 1244, as introduced by Mr. Brooks, would have required the Secret
Service to reimburse other Departments and Agencies for their assistance in
providing protection to the President, Vice President and others who qualify for
protection under 18 U.S.C. 3056. The Department fully supports this objective
and has indicated its support for the bill in a letter to Congressman Brooks, a
copy of which is attached (Tab A). The bill reported out of the subcommittee,
specifically the provisions on reimbursement sponsored by Congressman Fish,
does not appear fully to realize the basic purpose for which it was originally
developed. This letter will address several issues raised by the bill as presently
drafted.
In order to preserve the intent of 13.11. 1244, as introduced, the Department
recommends that Congressman Fish's amendment be deleted in its entirety as it
relates to exempting the Department of Defense and the Coast Guard from gaining
reimbursement for support provided to the Secret Service. GAO's expressed con-
cerns with the Department's ability to properly determine incremental costs
attributable to the type of support, and the requirements of the Secret Service are
unfounded in fact. The Department presently provides similar services to other
agencies on a reimbursable basis and has little difficulty determining incremental
costs. If the amendment must remain in the bill in some form, we suggest that the
Defense/Coast Guard exemption apply only to Section 2(1) and further, that the
remaining exemption apply only to support provided directly to the President and
Vice President.
Our concern with regard to reimbursement arises from two primary sources.
First, 31 U.S.C. 628 states: "Except as otherwise provided in law, sums appro-
priated for the various branches of expenditure in the public service shall be
applied solely to the objects for which they are respectively made, and for no
others."
Since P.L. 90-331 and 18 U.S.C. 3056 are silent on the issue of. reimbursement,
it would seem that the provisions of 31 U.S.C. 628 presently preclude expenditure
of defense funds to accomplish the mission of the Secret Service.
Secondly, under the provisions of 31 U.S.C. 686, the so-called Economy Act, this
Department makes available its unique capabilities to the remainder of the federal
government when it is determined to be in the national interest and beneficial to
overall governmental economy. While the Secret Service has maintained that
P.L. 90-331 exempts them from the provisions of the Economy Act, P.L. 90-331
is silent as to reimbursement. The legislative history in terms expresses the intent
of Congress that the resources of other federal agencies be made available to support
the Secret Service, but not their budgets.
The Department considers the provisions for reimbursement to include only
incremental costs, i.e., those costs over and above the cost to the Department for
maintaining a given capability in support of its military mission. The reimburse-
ment cost would not include military salaries, purchase of airplanes or other costs
normally incurred in the operation of the Military Departments. It would include,
however, incremental aircraft operating and maintenance costs, rental cars and
the services of explosive ordnance disposal and other specialized personnel.
The argument has been made in support of the Fish amendment that the
Secret Service cannot properly budget for its security requirements, as the demand
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14 2FIA-RDP77M00144R001100190001-2
is not internally controlled. Obviously, the Department of Defense is in no
better position in this regard than Secret Service, and has far less basis in expertise
for making estimates. Treasury may seek and in the past has sought, supplemental
appropriations like any other agency. This means of supplemental funding would
further lay out for the Congress the true cost of the Secret Service's protective
function.
The mechanics of properly accounting for support provided other agencies are
rather simple and straight forward. As noted earlier, the chargeable costs are
incremental and in a majority of cases clearly evident, such as per diem, rental
cars, aircraft support for a non-military mission, etc. In those few cases where
there may be some doubt as to the proper division of costs, they can be negotiated
with the agency concerned. To date, there have not been situations that could not
be resolved, except in instances in which reimbursement from the Secret Service
was requested.
Attached at Tab B is an example of the costs incurred by the Department
during the 1972 election campaign. While the Secret Service has not informed us
of the level of support required for 1976, the coincidence of the election with the
Bicentennial celebration and the Olympics in Canada may require some addi-
tional level of expenditures.
Attached at Tab C is an example of the annual recurring costs to the Depart-
ment, exclusive of the Presidential/Vice Presidential costs primarily arising from
Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) support to the Secret Service. These costs
arise in the main from requirements to protect foreign dignitaries under the
provisions of 18 U.S.C. 3056.
The Military Departments have a unique relationship to the President. We do
not consider the reach of H.R. 1244 to extend to those services that the Depart-
ment provides directly to the President. In his role as Commander-in-Chief, the
President looks to the Department of Defense to provide hue necessary equipment,
services and facilities to fulfill certain of his national security responsibilities.
These include communications, aircraft, personnel and certain types of physical
security measures. These are provided directly to the President, not to the
USSS, even though it may exercise a degree of operational control. Accord-
ingly, they are considered to be appropriate Defense Department expenditures,
unlike support provided to other protectevs of the USSS. This rationale also
applies to the Vice President as the primary Presidential successor.
The main issues to be resolved by H.R. 1244 are budgetary control and account-
ability. The Department of Defense believes it is both practical and proper that
the Secret Service budget for the requirements of its particular mission and
reimburse for support provided by other Departments. This method of doing
business is consistent with normal inter-agency federal practice and with Con-
gress' desire to account for the costs attending the security functions of the
Secret Service.
Sincerely,
MARTIN R. HOFFMANN.
Hon. JACK BROOKS,
House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. BROOKS: This office has received a copy of 11.R. 17311, introduced
October 11, 1974, a bill "To establish procedures and regulations for certain
protective services provided by the United States Secret Service." It is understood
that this bill is intended to replace H.R. 11.499, which was introduced on Novem-
ber 15, 1973, and reported out by the Subcommittee on Claims and Governmental
Relations in October of this year. Since there are some changes in the replacement
bill, H.R. 17311, the following comments are submitted on H.R. 17311 for your
consideration.
Since enactment of Public Law 90-331 (June 6, 1968) the Department of
Defense has consistently taken the position that the Secret Service should re-
imburse the Department for the support provided to the Secret Service under
section 2 of that Act. The Department of Defense has a general policy of requiring
any other Federal agency to whom it provides support to reimburse it for the
actual costs incurred. The statutory authority for this general rule is found in the
Economy Act, 31 U.S.C. 686, which requires a Federal agency to reimburse any
other agency upon request, for the actual cost of any support provided to it.
Accordingly, the Department of Defense strongly supports section 2(1) of H.R.
17311, which requires the Secret Service to reimburse other Federal departments
and agencies whenever they provide support to the Secret Service on a temporary
basis.
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/1: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
The following technical comments are also provided for your consideration. A
conforming amendment in section 7 may be necessary in order to be consistent
with the new language in section. 2(l) of the bill. It is recommended that the
phrase, "except those made pursuant to section 2 (1)," be stricken out in section 7
on line 25 of page 4 and line 1 of page 5. Since there is no longer an exception in
section 2(1) requiring certain support to be provided by other agencies without
reimbursement, it appears that all expenditures under this bill will be from funds
appropriated to the Secret Service. This raises the question whether the reporting
requirements of section 8 of the bill are still necessary. If the purpose of the
section is to provide accountability for nonrcimbursable funds spent by other
agencies, it may no longer be necessary. However, if its purpose is to create a
reporting requirement even for expenditures for which a Federal department is
later reimbursed, then section 8 would still serve a valid purpose.
In conclusion, the Department of Defense strongly recommends enactment
of section 2(1) of H.R. 17311 as presently written.
The Office of Management and Budget advises that, from the standpoint of
the Administration's program, there is no objection to the presentation of this
letter for consideration.
Sincerely,
SUGGESTED LANGUAGE To MODIFY THE FISH AMENDMENT
Page 3, line 11 Strike "respectively." and insert "respectively;"
(4) The provisions contained in Section 2(1) of the Act requiring reimburse-
ment of Federal Departments and agencies assisting the United States Secret
Service in its protective duties shall not apply to equipment, facilities and services
provided by the Department of Defense or the Coast Guard in direct support of
the President or Vice President.
DOD COSTS IN SUPPORT OF THE PROTECTION OF PRESIDENTIAL AND VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES DURING
ELECTION YEAR PERIOD, JANUARY-NOVEMBER 1972
Air
Cost elements Army Navy Force DCA Total
Military labor:
Personnel services__________________________ $571,806 $43,291 $166,244 $46,099 $827,440
Subsistence and quarters________________________________ 2,600 102 ------------ 2,702
Aircraft operations -------------------------------------- 907 ___-__-_____-_..______-- 907
Motor vehicle transportation__________________________________________ 91 ------------ 91
Subtotal_________________________________ 571,806 46,798 166,437 46,099 831,140
Incremental costs:
Personnel services______________________________________ 1,068 3,302 12,527 16,897
Subsistence and quarters________________________________ 270 ------------------------ 270
Travel_____________________________________ 614,107 6,557 333,112 44,997 998,773
Transportation of things_____________________ 1,029 ------------ 404 ------------ 1,433
Aircraft operations__________________________ 79,380 8,022 -__-_------------------- 87,402
Motor vehicle transportation__________________________________________ -3,003 41,933 44,936
Consumable material________________________ 4,276 798 5,420 10,494
Investment equipment________________________ 229 ------------ 229
Communications____________________________________________________ 1,497 237,504 239,001
Clothing allowances_________________________ 25,414 ------------ 4,100 ------------ 29,514
Other (toll calls and generator,` room and
trailer rentals)..:t------------------------ 153 272 1,350 ------------ 1,775
Subtotal_______________________________ 724,359 16,189 347,795 342,381 1,430,724
Total costs:
Personnel services__________________________ 571,806 44,359 169,546 58,626 844,337
Subsistence and quarters________________________________ 2,870 102 __---------- 2,972
Travel_____________________________________ 614,107 6,557 333,112 44,997 998,773
Transportation of things______________________ 1,029 ------------ 404 ------------ 1,433
Aircraft operations__________________________ 79,380 8,929 ------------------------ 88,309
Motor vehicle transportation__________________________________________ 3,094 41,933 45,027
Consumable material________________________ 4,276 ------------ 798 5,420 10,494
Investment equipment_______________________________________________ 229 ______.____- 229
Communications____________________________________________________ 1,497 237,504 239,001
Clothing allowances_________________________ 25,414 ------------ 4,100 ------------ 29,514
Other (toll calls and generator, room and
trailer rentals)____________________________ 153 272 1,350 ------------ 1,775
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14 ~YIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
MDW----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$1,282
FORSCOM----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17,094
Health SVC----------
$3, 050
TRADOC-----------------------------------------------------------------------
446,823
--------------
Total------------------------------ --------------------------------------
449,873
22,376
1 These figures are illustrative of our ability to break out detailed incremental casts and do not represent the total
DOD costs in support of the U.S.S.S. These figures represent only expenditures within the continental United States.
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
APPENDIX 2.-H.R. 1244 AS SUBSEQUENTLY AMENDED BY THE
SUBCOMMITTEE
[COMMITTEE PRINT]
Showing H.R. 1244, as reported by the Committee on the
Judiciary and as amended by the Subcommittee on Legis-
lation anti National Security
For the information of Members:
(1) The amendments by the Conu:rittee on the Judiciary are as follows:
(A) The matter in roman. iio type is to be omitted.
(B) The matter in italic is to be inserted.
(2) The amendments by the Subcemia ttee on Legislation and National
Security are as follows:
(A) The matter in boldface roman linetype and italic linetype is
to be .omitted.
(B) The matter in boldface ita?ie is to be inserted.
9=1TII COSGR
SESSION S
1ST IiHSION
A jL. R
1244
[Report No. 94-1O5, Part 1]
Ii THE 1.10 [SE OF Rl TIZESJ N TATIVES
J.k-,u.1IIC 11,1975.
Mr. 13nooKs introduced the following hill; which was referred to the Com-
miltees on Go rerninieat Uherati+ms till,[ (he.1a.diciaiy
AIASCII 20,1975
Reported Erom the Committee on the Judiciary, with ,uncndments and ordered
to be printed
A BILL
To establish procedures and regulations for certain protective
services provided by the T nited States Secret 'Service.
3. Be it enacted by the Senate and house of liepeesenta-
2 hives o f .t/ie United States o f America in. Congi ess assembled,
3 That this Act may be cited as the "Presidential Protection
4 Assistance Act of 197:
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14 :22IA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
0
1 u$EC`. 2. In performance 'of the protcetiti-e ditties of the
2 United States Secret Service pursuant to section 3056 of tide
3 18 of the l[?.tiied States Code (pertaiuiu(y to the protection
4 of the President of the limited States and other persons) amid
5 the first section of the AN entitled "An Act. to authorize the
6 United States Secret Service to furnish protection to major
7 presidential or vice presidential candidates", approved June
8 6, 1968 (Public Law 90-331; 82 Stet. 170), Federal de-
9 partments and agencies shall assist the Diuted States Secret
10 Service. y-
rei3nl;ttrser teHt, persut net;
11 +1+ pre i4it?g with
12 ettttiprxent; W facilities on ft tct?-tporar b?tsis; (1) pro-
13 vidiag 4r-il/r e rt setrcent, ichen requested by the Di-
14 rector of the United States Secret Service or his author.
15 ized representative and on a reimbursable basis, services,
16 erju.ipment, or facilities on ca temporary basis except that
17 the Department of Defense and the Coast Guard may
18 shall provide such services, equipment, or facilities on a
19 temporary basis without reiurbitr,enrent when assisting the
20 United States Secret Service in its duties directly related
21 to the protection of the President or Vice President of the
22.
23
24
United States or other officer next in the order of suc-
cession to the office of President;
(2) providing, upon advance written request of the
Director of the Dulled States Secret Service or his au-
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/147- CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
7 thorized represetitative and upon reimbursement by the
2 United States Seeret Serviee of aetua.l ..easts; on a
3 reimbursable basis such facilities, equipment, and serv-
4 ices as are required by the United States Secret Service
5 to provide full-time security for each protectee at no more
G than one property at a.lime not in Government owner-
this panq,,raph. Where :more Muni one fmniily member:
ship or control, 3(1(11 property having been designated by
a President, President-elect, former President, or any
other person entitled to protection under the above pro-
visions of law, as the one properly to he secured wider
12 is eligible for Secret Service protection, there shall be
13 only one such designated property allowed..per family.
14 However-, : Provided, however, That such limitation
15 shall not he construed to apply to nictnhcrs of the imme-
16 diiite family who do iiot permanently reside with. the
17 person entitled to protection;
18 (3) providing, upon- advance written request of
19 the Director of the l"nited States Secret Service or his
20 authorized representative and ape reimbursement b
21 the Secret Serviee of aetusl costs; on a reimbursable
22 basis such facilities, equipment, and services, as inc
23 required by the United States Secret Service to seeure
24 provide full-time security at 'any ether property not
25. covered by paragraph (2) of this section; and not in
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
28
8
9
10
11
16
17
78
19
20
.21
22
23
24
4
Government ovriier-hip or control to the extent. that such
expenditures do not cunnulatively exceed $10,000 at and-
one property owned, leased, occupied, or othctwise*
utilized by persons entitled to protection under sucli
sections of title 18 and such Act unless approved by
resolutions adopted by the Committees on Appropria-
tions of the House and Senate, respectively.
,SEC. :3. Expenditures by the hnited States Secret -Service
for maintaining a permanent ~g-mi rd detail and for permanent
facilities, equipment, and scrvu es to secure non-Government
property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise utilized by
persons entitled to protection under the above provisions of
law shall be limited to properties described in t4eu
as provided in section 2(2) and (3) of iltis Act.
2{2}
SEe. 4. All purchases and contracts entered into pursu-
ant. to sections 2 (2), 2 (;) and 3 of this Act shall be made
in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Property
and Administrative Service, A c, of 19 4-19.
SEc. 5. No pz~yiuv11ts shall he. made pursuant to tllis Act
for services, equ itoneni, er lacilba`s ordered, piiicliased,
leased, or otherwise procured I,.%- persons other than of eer?s
or employees of the federal ( bb:vvermnent dilly authorized by
the Director of the Vnited States Secret Service to iiiii1w quell
procurements.
6.:111 inlprnvcrncnis and other items ,acquired pur-
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/1h: CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
5
suant to this Act shall remain be the property of the Fcdcial
2 Government. I"pon termination of entitlement to Secret Scrv-
g ice protection or if a President, President-elect, former Presi-
4 dent, or other person entitled to protection under section
5 3056 of title 18 of the United States Code and the first
0 section of the Act entitled "An Act to authorize the United
.7 States Secret Service to furnish protection to major Presi-
8 dential or Vice Presidential candidates", approved June 6,
'j 1968 (Public Law 90--331; 82 Stat. 170), designates a dif-
10 ferent property to be so secured, all improvements or other
11 items shall be removed from the original property unless it
12 is. economically unfeasible to do so, as determined by the
13 United States Secret Service, except that, such improvements
1d or other items shall be removed and the property restored
15 to its original state, regardless of the determination of eco-
1.6 nomic unfeasibility, if the owner of such property at the time
17 ? of determination requests removal. If I p evem er ether
18. items are net r-exove4, the o +r of the property at the ti: e
19 of 4etermination shall eentp(?nsate the C4over-iiffien for suet
20 intliroventet2ts er elites items to the extent they ht-e in--
23
eretteed the fair ttrarket :v One of the property as of - the da
of transfer or tertnittatien. If improvements or other items are
not removed, the owner of the property containing the im.
provements at the time of termination shall compensate the
Government for the original cost of such improvements or
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/14 :3COIA-RDP77M00144RO01100190001-2
6
-other items or the amount they hare increa..ed the fair mar-
ket value, as determined by the General Accounting Office,
of the. property as of the date of transfer or termination
-whichever is less.
SEC. 7. Expenditures under this Act shall be from funds
specifically appropriated to the United States Secret Service
for.carrying out, the provisions of this Ae . Pict, with the ex-
ception of those expenditures exempted.in section 2(.1). Public
fiords not so appropriated shall not I;e. used 'nr the purpose of
securing any non-novermne00t:t11}--owned property owned,
leased, occupied; or otherwise utilized by persons ent-itied to
-protection under section 3056 of title 18 of the United. States
Code and the first section of tale Act entithcd "An act to an
th.orize, the United States Secret Service to furnish protec-
tion to major presidential or vice-presidential candidates",
approved June 6, 1968 (Public Law 90-331.; 82 Stat. 170) .
Six. S. The Director of the United States Secret Service,
the Secretary DeTr+r4+rte-r4 of Defense, and the Commandant,
of the. Coast -Guard shall transmit a detailed report of c.;-
penditures made pursuant to this Act to the. Committees on.
Appropriations, Committees on the Judiciary, and Commit-
feeg on Government Operation, of the Ilou~c of Representa-
tives:.and? Senate on Mardi 3I and September 30 of each
year.
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77MOOl 44RO01 100190001-2
 Approved For Release 2005/12/11 CIA-RDP77M00144R001100190001-2
7
1 Suc. 9. 7+.xpenditures made pursuant to this Act-sliall be
2 subject to audit by the Comptroller General.-and.his author-
ized representatives, who shall have access to all records
4 relating to such expciiditnres. The Comptroller General shall
5 transmit a report of the results of tiny such audit to t-lie Com-
G mittees on Appropriations, Committees on the Judiciary, and
Committees on Government Operations of the House of Rep-
resentatives and the Senate.
SEc. 10. Section 2 of the Act entitled "An Act to auth-
orize the ITnitc?l States Secret Service to furnish protection
to major presidential and. ice-presidc~~tia.L.candiiltes", ap-
proved June 0, 1968 (Public Law 90-331; 82 Stat. 170),
is repealed.
Approved For Release 2005/12/14: CIA-RDP77M00l44R001100190001-2