(UNTITLED)

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP78-03092A001100100002-4
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 41
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 19, 2002
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: December 21, 1972
• Content Type: MIN

Approv;or Release 2002/08/26: CIA-RDP78-2A001100100002-4
SECRET
. . . The 195th meeting of the CIA RETIREMENT
BOARD convened at 2:00 p. m. on Thursday, 21 December 1972, with
the following present:
25X1A
25X1A
Mr. Harry B. Fisher, Chairman
DDP Member
DI Alternate Member
DS&T Member
DS Member
Legal Adviser
ec nical Adviser
xecutive Secretary
Recording Secretary
Deputy Director of
Security (IOS) - In his own case only.
Mr. Howard J. Osborn, Director of Security -
In the case of
I - In his own case only.
25X1A
25X1A
0
And if I might say on
- and I want you all to know
that I have no objection to your jumping in with questions of your own -
but the main thing, to me, throughout this case is: But what did YOU do?
He mentions lots of sensitive projects, but from really almost personal
experience, as well as I understand it, he was the supervisor pretty far
up the line. And certainly my questions will be geared to: Okay, you
were Chief, Technical Branch, 1959 to 1961. You received credit for
the inspections you did abroad. He mentions positive operations. I'd
like to hear about what he did in positive operations. And maybe he
has some time there -- but he is looking for some 27 months.
He speaks of getting the engineer ready for
0
But what did HE do about it? Overseas liaison. To the extent he went
overseas to meet these people, he got credit for it. We don't normally
give credit for liaison in this country.
He then speaks about a one year project detecting
SECRET
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1 C
25X1
Approved For Release 2002/08/26 : CIA- P78-03092A001100100002-4
 Approvedr Release 2002/08/26: CIA-RDP78-0-2A001100100002-4
SECRET
hazardous. But we will hear him out on it.
He was on this BoB Committee for security of the
White House and Presidency. You know, in my opinion his case is
really worse than that of
I He says he "was involved in" - and I think
25X1A
He speaks o 25X1
but I'm afraid the monitoring is really a few spaces removed from actually
doing it. He does make a pitch at the end that although it was a super-
visory relationship he "case officered" these things, and I'd like to know
what he means by that and by "operational matters other than in a super-
visory position. "
0
again his personal involvement
And finally, from 1969 to date he speaks of handling
feeling that he personally didn't do any of these --
MR. FISHER: Now I know a bit how he feels. He is
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
relationship -- but I have the feeling that if we gave it to him we would
have to give it to
and Howard Osborn, and Bob Wattles, and
Jack Coffey, and right on up the line. Maybe I'm wrong. But we will
He speaks of the
I really don't
know what he is talking about or what he did. He was the contact with
I don't know whether he did it under cover, or
if they knew who he was -- what the circumstances surrounding that are.
The training and documentation of an agent going overseas. Again, what
z
25X1A
25X1 C
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/08126 : CIA-RDP78-03092A001100100002-4
 Approved, pr Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-0 2A001100100002-4
SECRET
did HE do? And finally, involvement in recruiting this female asset --
I just don't have a feel for it.
Naturally both
strongly about getting into the CIARDS. In the case of
feel pretty
lawyer and he was certainly honest enough to tell me that he was planning
to practice law
It also gives me a slight twinge when he
says - "And I will have 25 years of service and therefore, at the age of 46,
I'm entitled to retirement" -- which of course he isn't. Nevertheless,
he feels that Security being in a surplus situation and being subjected now to
a further cut, that maybe he could be surplussed out. It hurts me, because
I feel that Security probably would like to get rid of some of these senior
people who are blocking progress, but if he doesn't get into this System he
can't do anything for four more years, and that's a major 4ft change in his
planning, so he is fighting pretty hard.
Unless he is surplussed.
MR. FISHER: Not at age 46. He has to be 50 even to be
surplussed, to get an annuity.
could go out as surplus if
we cane apply it to Security in the months ahead of us, and he wouldn't have
to take a cut. So Art's stake is not as great. And he is past 55, so
there's no further reduction -- he would just lose the three and three-quarters
percent he would get if he were in CIARDS.
Do you feel there's any discussion you would like to
have before we bring him in?
1 -1
Although he isn't eligible for optional
retirement yet, is he?
MR. FISHER: Oh no, he's a long way from that. He has
only 23 years and 11 months of Federal service.
He will be 60 before he has his 30 years.
In this Agency-- Yes, you're right.
made quite a point of one of our antecedent
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
cases h QtMrctoe or Re]Zbiehk002 26heC P98ai0g2 ir1?6190(102-4 Now
3 SECRET
 Approver Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-992A001100100002-4
I've forgotten which one --
SECRET
MR. FISHER: One was a 1969 case-- And
gets pretty legalistic. He's saying: You made that decision, you have
to stay with it -- you can't go back and forth. On the other hand, we
came in and talked to, who we turned
down, who did much the same thing - contractual security. Do you
recall` his name, Murray?
MR. FISHER: It may have been.
both on up right at ten after 2;00.
MR. FISHER: I'm trying to think - do we want to take
them together? Are they coming in together?
Is Mr. Osborn outside waiting to come in?
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
MR. FISHER: I hate to ask Howard Osborn to wait outside, 25X1A
but I'd really like to get
he says with Osborn afterwards. Don't you feel we should see
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
hen joined the
meeting at the invitation of the Board . . .
MR. FISHER: Art, you have been through this quite a
few times in other cases, so you know generally what we are driving at.
I'd just like to get - it for the record that you know that the sensitivity
of a project - the sensitivity of the work you're involved in is not as
significant as your personal involvement, and again, either Ift hazard
II
Approved For Release 2002AWUA-RDP78-03092A001 10 0100002-4
 Approved~p1 Release 2002/08/26: CIA-RDP78-0 2A001100100002-4
SECRET
or stringent trade craft to protect your own cover. I think this is where
yne. u,.
we have some trouble in relating the supervisory role oxs twice removed
from the actual operation, versus your involvement.
Along that line it is interesting that the Director -
Mr. Helms - was considered by a special panel of Larry Houston and
myself and he wasn't put into the CIARDS. I mean, Helms actually asked
us to think about it. And he tended to agree with us. All I'm saying is
that obviously he is responsible for everything the Agency is doing, but he
personally agreed that on balance he was not qualified under the rules.
He doesn't have any overseas, does he?
MR. FISHER: A lot of TDY but that was all.
But again, the overseas time is good. What we are
talking about is the non-overseas time, and that has to be good --
0
Is it jusiasically the supervisory part
of it that concerns you?
MR. FISHER: Well, let's run through it. You speak in
1959 and 1961 of being Chief, Technical Branch, and that you did inspections
abroad. Well, obviously, the inspections abroad you have been given
credit for. I don't know - do you feel that you are also entitled to
I do, and also many of the things that we
were involved in at that time-- Those were rather hectic days. As
you perhaps know - or many of you know - when I came in in 1959 we had
a small group of relatively non-professional people, and then because of
and a few things like this, we built rather rapidly. Actually
we got 22 more slots - all engineering slots, and began to look into the
threat, and found, of course, they were a lot more - sophisticated,
I think, than we believed. Certain things like - you remember
And as we found these things out
Approved For Release 200
E IA-RDP78-03092A001100100002-4
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
 Approve?or Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-(W92A001100100002-4
SECRET
25X1A
everybody got more and more concerned. The DDP got more concerned
about the threat -- the higher level got more concerned about the threat.
We dashed wildly around trying to really build a capability. In fact, as you
recall, I was trying like mad to hire engineers, and even went out myself
on some of them. Meanwhile the demands kept building up, and we
didn't :have the men . Me - I'm a lawyer - I knew nothing about
electronics, so I had to get a grasp on that, mostly to know what was going
on, and also to make sure the engineers weren't giving me a snow job of
some kind.
I did - I worked directly with the DDP on many
things concerning the threat - their concern. I arranged things -
briefings, training, liaison type - conducted liaison myself. And when
I needed something for
MR. FISHER: What do you mean, you went out with the
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
or something, I went out with the
25X1A
Generally around in the Washington area.
Now this doesn't count in the overseas part of it --
MR. FISHER: You mean you went out to our own installations?
25X1 A Right.
MR. FISHER: You see, Art, we are going to have a lot
of questions of this same nature. ' Nobody questions the difficulty of the
job, or the significance of the target you were shooting against. What we
are trying to get at is - was it hazardous ? or did you have to practice
stringent security and tradecraft? That is really the heart of it.
You take Commo, there were a lot of engineers who
6
Approved For Release 2002/0 : PIRDP78-03092A001100100002-4
 Approveor Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP7892A001100100002-4
SECRET
25X1A
sort of developed
25X1A
25X1A
equipment which was used overseas, but that didn't
give them qualifying service. Its a personal type of thing--
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
probably bothers you is the supervisory thing. I think you have to
recognize that in the Agency there are many supervisory jobs where
you can't just sit back and be a supervisor, you actually have to become
deeply involved yourself -- you have to be the case officer on it. Many
of these things I mentioned along the way, that was exactly it.
MR. FISHER: First let me go on here.
there with you --
Then you did go on to the positive side of it --
25X1A
25X1A
MR. FISHER: You're not normally doing a
25X1A under those conditions.
25X1A
Harry, before we leave the
positive responsibility for the Washington area, and back in the old days
interest to Mr. McCone.
MR. FISHER:
On the
Well, I know one of the things that
again we all -- I certainly was
The other part is that M we had the
as I indicated, many of them were of
I'd like to go on down the list here.
I think it might be well to draw a distinction between the type of
is protecting our own--
I think if any
I think we have heard you on
were done
where you had to operate under covert circumstances, that that is the thing
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/0&E RDP78-03092A001100100002-4
 Approvejor Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-QV92A001100100002-4
SECRET
MR. FISHER: Yes, that was my next question.
You then speak of working directly on a number of
As you said, you are not a technician.
What would your participation have been?
I would help the men so far as wiring
I know enough about that--
MR. FISHER: Could you give us a for instance?
things, many of them were under what you would say would be controlled
situations. Many of them were in ~ Headquarters Building. Some of
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
When I'm speaking of these positive
this type of thing.
25X1A
MR. FISHER: Well, Art, are you saying you went out
where you made --
In some instances. I'm not saying that
it was extensive. Generally speaking the men would go.
I was pretty tied up in an extensive installation we
had for Mr. McCone here.
MR. FISHER: You mean that is protective, though?
25X1A
25X1A
It was of a positive nature. 25X1A
MR. FISHER: Well, are you reluctant to discuss it?
No, I'm not reluctant to discuss it.
But McCone was quite a one for making sure that
regardless of where they were - here or home. And he was pretty
fussy about it, let's put it that way. It was this type of thing.
MR. FISHER: You then speak of case officering the
covert assignment of an Agency technical security engineer
Just about what I say-- And here again
I'm trying to distinguish it from the supervisory things. And actually
it's basically that - I case officered it, between making the arrangements
8
Approved For Release 2002/08126 0 LAcRDP78-03092AO01100100002-4
VO E it j
Again, what was your personal involvement in this?
25X1A
25X1A
25X1 C
25X1A
25X1A
 Approve4or Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-Q;092A001100100002-4
EGRET
25X1A
with the Division,
-- which was 25X1A
pretty deep -- working out obtaining the equipment that would be needed,
because it was supposed to represent initially a sophisticated threat --
that is why I was over there so long working in the
In other words I lived with it day after day after day. Finally I went
over, as I have indicated, and
and gave him the go ahead
25X1
25X1A
25X1A
25X1
25X1A
MR. FISHER: Incidentally, we might as well ask now,
MR. FISHER: Of course you've gotten credit for the time
overseas. Again it was the administrative aspect of getting a man over-
seas under cover that you were-- Administrative and technical in
terms of the equipment --
Administrative, technical, and the
expertise. It's hard to describe. Actually to me, and I'm sure it is to
you fellows, hard to describe where is or what is say the support of the
DD/P - you know? Now when I'm a regular administrator sitting
back and giving orders and doing the normal administrative things, no
question, I'm an administrator. But when I'm head over heels involved
in the case, and then, say, in this particular instance, not only this but
provide sufficient
MR. FISHER: No question, it is the support of covert
operations, but that is really everybody in the DD/P.
Well, and as you are saying, it was a successful
operation in that the man over there did discover
involved in determining what had happened - this and that.
- trying to establish something that is going to
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/09RDP78-03092A001100100002-4
 Approved,pr Release 2002/08/26: CIA-RDP78-04J02A001100100002-4
SECRET
other than on your overseas tours have you been under any cover?
Yes, I was for I'm not just sure how long,
initially wh en I came with the Agency. I came in first with IOS and I
was with them for several months, at which time I was under cover --
MR. FISHER: But by and large since 1959 you have been
just plain CIA, right?
Other than when I was overseas, yes.
MR. FISHER: You speak of extensive liaison with
counterparts --
And
(were in there, too.
MR. FISHER: Again, I can agree with it, but we have
never given domestic qualifying service for liaison with counterparts.
When you went overseas, again you got the credit for it.
Now you speak of two other assignments. In 196Z
or 1963 - you indicated you weren't sure which - you were assigned on
a part-time basis for approximately one year to a project charged with
determining a means of
you rra de trips out to the
here ? Did you feel it was hazardous ?
and so on. What is the basis
Well, as I started off there, it may
or may not be considered qualifying. Certainly it was unique. Certainly
it was unique. And here again if you want to say hazardous-- I guess
the only M- hazard part came when I was
MR. FISHER: But you were there as an Agency repre-
sentative, no question about that.
That is right.
MR. FISHER: Okay. Then you were assigned on
practically a full-time basis as M the principal Agency representative on
this Committee to check into the technical and physical security of the
10
25X1A
25X1A
25X6
25X1A
25X6
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
or U
Approved For Release 2002/08IDP78-03092A001100100002-4
 25X1 Approved For Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-03092AO01100100002-4
Next 2 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-03092AO01100100002-4
 Approvedr Release 2002/08/26: CIA-RDP78-00 2A001100100002-4
SECRET
MR. FISHER: And somebody else recruited her.
Well, now, you are sort of leaving it to Osborn,
I suppose, to talk to the "number of sensitive operations of direct interest
to the Director"?
I
I can tell you basically that there were a considerable number and they
were very extensive. And here again I wasn't out doing it, but I handled
them on a 24 hour basis, believe me!
MR. FISHER: Well, I'm sure you know, Art, if you
cant tell enough about that, that you always have the opportunity of going
to the Director and saying: "Mr. Helms, you know what I was doing -- I
can't tell the Board all about it. " And then if Mr. Helms wants to wave
the magic wand-- That hasn't happened very often but he has done it on
one or two occasions.
25X1A
I realize that -- and, believe me, I'd
be glad. to tell you, except I can't.
Here again I think all I can say is, these things I'm
talking about, yes, I was a supervisor-- In fact, I've been a chief
of something or other since 1954. But here again I think definitely there
is a distinction between what you do as a supervisor and what you do over
and above your supervisory responsibility.
MR. FISHER: I can only repeat-- And I know it's hard--
But the Board has played around with these questions for a long time, so
it's fairly easy for us to grasp. We are still ultimately looking for the
practice of stringent tradecraft to protect your cover. Not how sensitive
it is, not how expertly it was handled, not how much it was in support of
clandestine operations. It's a very personal involvement that made life
pretty complicated. As a matter of fact very few people under official
cover have gotten domestic qualifying service. Usually M it's somebody
Approved For Release 2002/ =`.` I-RDP78-03092A001100100002-4
Well, yes, as much as he would like. 25X1A
 Approved4 qr Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-0 2A001100100002-4
SECHL
outside the Headquarters Building
during this entire period you were overt CIA.
What about this uniqueness of the
assignment? In other words, I point out there, for what you think it's
worth, that sure, I could probably go out and get a job as a security officer,
but I don't think I could get a job paying the money or involving the respon-
sibility that I could if I was able to tell what I've done, what my qualifications
are.
MR. FISHER: Again, we think - and so far the Director
has supported us - that the man leaving here can say: "I worked for CIA
for 20 years and I became a senior officer in the Office of Security, with a
wide variety of responsibilities" -- and we can write a pretty good resume
of Agency employment. Obviously it doesn't get down into specifics, but
that isn't going to hurt you terribly in terms of your getting a job. As a
matter of fact, as you probably know, the Security people have been doing
better than anybody else in getting connections.
Jay, did you have any questions?
I had one concerning two of your major
blocks of time here, Art, that concerned that period 1959 to 1965 when
you say that you would estimate a minimum of 16 months of qualified
time. I wanted to know whether that would be your summation of the time
when you were actually out in the field, so to speak, helping audio teams
or whatever you were doing.
Let me say that this is an estimate of
No.
As I see it, 25X1 C
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/8>g/ g4-RDP78-03092A001100100002-4
 Approved,rr Release 2002/08/26: CIA-RDP78-04U2A001100100002-4
SECRET
what I consider was over and above supervisory. After all, I was
Chief, Technical Division, something like five and a half years. So it's
an estimate but it is an estimate of what I did over and above what I
normally did as a supervisor.
25X1A
D
so that you estimate from 1969 to present-
25X1 A I I Right.
And that would be true of the 14 months or
This would be the extraordinary duties,
in your opinion, that go beyond what you would normally--
25X1A
Right.
MR. FISHER: I think Art's claiming uniqueness and
closeness to the operation rather than personal involvement in it, however.
I think he has indicated that - "No, I wasn't the guy out there"
25X1A
No, I wasn't the guy out on the street.
I What I am in effect
alleging - and perhaps it is that - the uniqueness - is the fact that I
handled these - I can only go back and say I handled these as a case officer
would handle an operation overseas, and not as an overall supervisor.
25X1A
1, have you any questions? 25X1 A
I have one problem and that is, some
areas which you feel you can't discuss, do you think Osborn is going to
discuss them?
25X1A
are, no.
')r,V1 A
I don't think he's going to say what they
operating under a system where you might get hurt - you might not ,get
into the CIARDS because Security won't let you talk?
MR. FISHER: This is as far as we go and then I'll alert
the Director that there is a period of time here that he feels is qualifying
Approved For Release 2002/03RDP78-03092A001100100002-4
 Approvedpr Release 2002/08/26: CIA-RDP78-04J02A001100100002-4
SECRET
and that only the Director (Mr. Helms) would know about it. I think we
will know better after we talk to Mr. Osborn--
25X1A
I will say here again, on these things
I'm talking about here I wasn't the guy out there on the street but I was
running these things 24 hours a day, and weekends --
MR. FISHER: The Director was looking to you to see that
these things got done --
25X1A
That it got done without a flap.
MR. FISHER: Okay, Art. Fine. Thank you.
25X1A
this point . . .
25X1
25X1A
the security of the
withdrew from the meeting at
He was on a team that made a review of
MR. FISHER: You could say that everything he did
was really overt --
25X1A
Yes, as overt as anything could be.
MR. FISHER: And Art knows it. I think he was
pretty depressed here. I think he was smart enough to know he wasn't
building up the greatest case in the world. He was honest enough to say
even on those things for the Director he didn't do it himself.
25X1A I I was the case officer and even Dick was only arguing for his
people who were out doing it.
25X1A
MR. FISHER: Art was overt CIA all the way.
. . . Mr. Howard Osborn, Director of Security,
joined the meeting at this point, at the invitation of the
Board . . .
17
Approved For Release 2002/08/ - DP78-03092A001100100002-4
25X1A
 Approved,,pr Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-00 2A001100100002-4
T
SEU U
MR. FISHER: We just had a session with Art, and
Art has been very honest-- And I don't think he has helped himself
very much, judging by the reaction of the Board, but Art has been honest
enough to say that he had been the supervisor of all of these things. He
is mentioning things like
but he admits that he $didn't do these things himself, that he
was supervising the people that did it. He hasn't even been under official
cover. He was an overt CIA employee. So he went out on a
I s a CIA representative, so he was involved in the security
as a CIA representative. I feel like a broken record
when I keep saying this to all of these people, that it could have been the
greatest job in the world that you did, and the most sensitive, but we are
addressing ourselves to qualifying service - which is: was it hazardous,
and did it take stringent security tradecraft to protect your personal cover?
Well, Art was never under cover and he never really got out in the streets
d oing these things.
All I want to get down to, so we don't even waste
your time, is his indication that maybe he did something for the Director,
which Art doesn't feel at liberty to discuss but that you would be glad to
verify. Now he says you would verify his direct participation in these
operations but he just made the point with us again - "Even for the Director
(Mr. Helms) - he sort of held me responsible for some of these, but I
didn't do it myself - somebody else was doing whatever was involved. "
Now can you clarify this in any way? Is there any-
thing he did that--
MR. OSBORN: Well, the things that he did were at the
direct instruction of the Director. In terms of sensitivity, neither Mr.
Colby nor Mr. Coffey knew anything about it. We currently have an IG
team in the Office of Security, and I checked with the Director what he wanted
18
Approved For Release 2002/08 lg- DP78-03092A001100100002-4
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
 Approve, ,or Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-q 92A001100100002-4
SECRET
me to exclude. Last year these activities absorbed some 80, 000 man-
hours of our time, and the Director said he doesn't want any part of it -
or any of it discussed with the IG -- just to give you an idea of its
sensitivity.
MR. FISHER: We are not asking you to tell us something
so hot and sensitive that even Mr. Colby--
MR. OSBORN: There's no point in both of us not sleeping
nights.
MR. FISHER: Again, in relation to
individual, in terms of qualifying service he needs 27 months. I think I
speak for this group in saying we don't see it. Would you like to talk to
the Director about nd get from him for me a statement that
25X1A
25X1A
he thinks I _J has done 27 months worth of qualifying service? 25X1A
MR. OSBORN: I can't, really, because the Director
leaves tomorrow morning and won't be back until the 4th of January.
MR. FISHER: Well, I'm in no hurry, if Art is not.
MR. OSBORN: Art wants to get out in December. If
he doesn't get out in December under the CIARDS he may want to consider
discontinued service -- which is all over as of 31 December.
Now, in these activities - first of all we had to
develop a capability that the Agency had never had before -- which we
have done in a period of three years. Secondly, we have had to devise
techniques never devised before, and Art devised them not in a supervisory
sense but in the sense of creating something --
MR. FISHER: Okay, that is great, but he sat at a desk
here in Langley --
MR. OSBORN: No, not all of it. He was out in the
And he did not supervise them as Deputy
Director, Security, for Investigations and Operational Support, he supervised
them as a case officer does, working out of the
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
19
Approved For Release 2002/0 L IRDP78-03092A001100100002-4
 Approved?ipr Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-Q92A001100100002-4
SECRET
MR. FISHER: But the sorts of things that
but to my mind it's a little different.
But what I would like to ask you, Harry, so I won't
waste your time by sending any more of these up, is how much credence
does the Board put on what you can tell the prospective employer about
what you can do. And don't give me all that crap that you tell them
you're a Security officer, because that means nothing any more
MR. OSBORN: You made a point of that with
anymore than if you tell them you're a personnel officer or you're a lawyer.
They say - "What kind of law? what kind of a Personnel Officer are you?
what do you specialize in? "
MR. FISHER: You don't have to say very much.
And I don't buy it. This is a highly specialized field and it's getting more
specialized --
are not going to be all that saleable on the outside. He can say: I
became an Assistant Director of Security for the CIA and then in that
capacity I know about inspections, I know about technical security, I served
25X1A to protect the security of the
25X1A
I grant you, he wasn't out on the street,
and I was involved in
0
etc. He can put a lot of these things he did overtly - and
we could help him come up with words that would convey most of the talents
I'm sorry, but our experience is that the Security
25X1 C
people are doing better at getting jobs than anybody else. And we've
been through this with engineers who have been
What difference does
it make what kind of signal he was analyzing, if he can say: I can analyze
a sophisticated signal and break it down into its simplest components. That
conveys a message, no matter what the signal is.
20
Approved For Release 2002/087 CIA-RDP78-03092A001100100002-4
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1 C
 Approvecor Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-Q92A001100100002-4
SECRET
So, again, I really don't think he would be terribly
inhibited. The chances are he has a job all lined up anyway.
MR. OSBORN: No, he doesn't. But what is the difference
type - -
MR. OSBORN: Is it the fact that he was out on the street
MR. FISHER: He didn't just say He spoke
a
MR. FISHER: If we err, it's erring on the side of trying
to give a guy something. But he indicated that he knew guys from the old
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1 C
I and so on. It sounded to us like a
fairly classical covert operation. Now maybe he snowed us --
MR. OSBORN: Well, I don't think he did.
MR. FISHER: But if a fellow just sits here in Langley
as an overt CIA employee-- And I'm not trying to downgrade in any
respect the initiative and the ingenuity that Art showed in developing these
techniques, but that isn't what we are paying off on --
MR. OSBORN: Well, I guess the only thing open to him is
discontinued service retirement. So be it.
MR. FISHER: At least that is what we are going to
recommend -- I think I speak for the Board here, because we discussed it
a little bit after Art left. It just isn't there. As I said to Art, we
considered the Director's case (the case of Mr. Helms), and he is not
in the CIARDS. Now he is ultimately responsible for all of these things,
t% r Approved For Release 2002/08/46?. U I4DP78-03092AO01100100002-4
 Approve +or Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78- ,p92A001100100002-4
SECRET
so if you carried that on out-- And Art is making much of the fact
that - "I don't want it as a supervisor but as a case officer. " We have a
lot of DD/P case officers who are really running operations right out of
here, but we don't give them credit for that. Maybe it isn't completely
consistent -- if he did the same thing overseas, he would get it.
Now I don't know where we are going down the line
on the surplus -- after you get another cut whether there will be another
possibility down the line that you will get involved in a surplus action.
And I hate to put Art into the position of - "I have to do something in seven
or eight days. " Art doesn't lose a whole lot -- he only loses the three
and three-quarters percent. And I'm not saying that that is insignificant.
But Art is not under age 55, so he doesn't have to take a reduced annuity
under the Civil Service. I don't know what his annuity would be, but let's
say it's $16, 000 - or whatever, so we're talking about maybe $650. 00 a
year - which is not a life, or death matter if he has really made up his
mind to go.
It's about 45%, probably, under Civil
But he also loses the pay raise and the
higher insurance by leaving by 31 December.
MR. FISHER: Like everyone else, we've said we will
let them go to January 8th. So he doesn't get cheated out of that.
surplus case.
He would be discontinued service.
You would have to treat him as a
MR. OSBORN: Well, that is a decision he will have to
MR. FISHER: But unless he feels that the Director might
overturn this, I can tell you I don't think anyone else will -- not on the
facts of this case -- it's a pretty weak case, really.
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
22
Approved For Release 2002/0 L2RDP78-03092A001100100002-4
 Approvecr Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-092A001100100002-4
SECRET
Director has been going on for three years?
MR. OSBORN: Yes.
This stuff he has been doing for the
And that is where he was creative, etc. ?
MR. OSBORN: Yes.
Can't you reach him today?
MR. OSBORN: I don't like to push him right now on this.
As a matter of fact, my counsel to Art is not to appeal it -- and I'm not
going to send any more up like this again.
MR. FISHER: Well, read them carefully, Oz.
MR. OSBORN: I do.
MR. FISHER: Some of them are good, some are not.
. . . . Mr. Osborn withdrew from the meeting at
this point .
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
MR. FISHER: Oz is like
the Security officers--
1
They feel all
I didn't have enough nerve to ask him why
does Art want to retire. He's a Grade 16, Deputy Director of Security.
It's not the business of this Board but I'm real curious why are we getting
rid of this guy? It's not as if he is really retiring.
MR. FISHER: The truth is Security is top heavy -- they've
got more people than they need up there. But that is not our problem
right now.
But Art is one of their good ones.
Can't you talk to the Director today?
Oz is upset.
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/08/t-:~DP78-03092A001100100002-4
 Approved? ~r Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-Qj 2A001100100002-4
SECRET
MR. FISHER: Certainly Oz seems to think so. Although
he's not fighting to keep Art on --
No, and that's what is incongruous.
MR. FISHER: Well, gentlemen, we've discussed this
one at some length. Is somebody ready to make a motion?
I move it not be approved.
Second.
. This motion was then unanimously carried . . .
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
I think it might be worthwhile, Harry,
to kind of look at all of the Office of Security cases. I'm also thinking of 25X1A
I
that we can argue our points of view.
Most of those we have approved have
MR. FISHER: Oh I'm not for a minute thinking we haven't
probably made a mistake, but I think if we made a mistake it has been on
giving domestic qualifying service --
That's it, and then that is the kind of precedent
that hurts you in the minds of these people who are turned down later.
MR. FISHER: I was delighted when the Director said:
You are going to make a mistake here and there, but if you're a bunch of
honest guys trying to call them as you see them, by and large you will do
all right. Now I'll admit that maybe it's the way the guy is presenting it
that it gets through and there might be somebody else sitting here and
not presenting his case as well as he should- But we haven. It given it
to anybody at Headquarters -- they've been the ones at the
0
- the fellows out under little or no cover working strictly in support
of the Clandestine Service.
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/08/[ -P78-03092A001100100002-4
coming up now. But I hope we have been consistent enough so
 Approver Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-(,92A001100100002-4
SECRET
Mr. Osborn doesn't stop it from coming to this Board.
MR. FISHER: Oh no, he won't -- that was just a momentary
pique, I think, saying he's not going to send any more up here.
0
I think it would open the door very wide in the DD/P.
MR. FISHER: Of course it would.
I honestly don't have any trouble turning this one
down. I really don't see it as qualifying.
Director today about
Because Osborn says he isn't going to.
And maybe the Director can't be reached today--
MR. FISHER: I'm not going to bother the Director about
this one on his last day before taking leave. Because I don't really think
that even Art thinks it's good. He's saying, "I didn't do it directly--"
"And even there, I didn't do it. " And then we all know
0
went to the Director -- and although Wes was in a different type of security,
it was almost the same type of thing - in effect working for the Director --
and the Director turned him down.
MR. FISHER: It takes a lot to get the message through to
if we ever okayed
why not
But if anybody submits one, I hope
If we were to allow this one to qualify then
Harry, I wonder if you could talk to the
I think he was quick to make that point -
in many ways did more than I
I and
then people would say: "What's the difference ?
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
We turned aw~.
Afewas Deputy Director of SB for awhile and he, too, felt that because
people under him were engaged in a lot of these things that he should get
qualifying service too.
We have three requests for voluntary re-
tirement:
, 8 January;
lZ February;
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25
DP78-03092A001100100002-4
AJ2
Approved For Release 2002/08ME
 Approveq pr Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-( 92A001100100002-4
SEC E
12 May.
31 December;
29 December; and
. . . Motion was then made and passed that the
above requests be approved . . .
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
joined the meeting at this
point to testify in his own behalf . . .
let me say a few words
first, although you and I have talked a bit, and let me repeat a couple of
things that I was saying to
Art mentioned a lot of sensitive operations that he
has been involved in, albeit in the supervisory relationship. And we
always sound like we're denigrating the work he did -- but we're not.
In other words, people could be doing very important, very sensitive work,
but ultimately this Board has thus far built up its case history on the very
personal relationship of the individual - was it hazardous and did he
really have to practice stringent tradecraft to protect his personal cover.
And those are the guidelines we will use in listening to you.
Now, while I'm sure you don't share this, in our
first review of your case and based on what you were doing, it didn't look
good enough to even have you come in -- which we normally do. Now
obviously since then we have recognized that you still have problems with
our finding, and therefore I certainly feel you are entitled to tell this group
what it is about your service that you feel is qualifying.
I don't want to restrict you but I wish you would
limit it to that type of relationship - whether it was qualifying or not. If
Approved For Release 2002/08/M:6CIA-RDP78-03092A001100100002-4
25X1A
25X1A
E I
S[CA
 Approvecr Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-02A001100100002-4
you want to challenge the whole concept, then I think that would be part of
your appeal. Because this Board has a charter to implement the CIA
Retirement System the way it has been written.
So, with that, whether you want to take it from there--
Would you like to make a statement or would you like me to ask some
questions ?
I'd like to first distribute a draft, if I 25X1A
may, a brief outline form, and talk to that. And then I'd be perfectly
willing to answer any questions as I go along, or later.
Gentlemen, I'm happy to have the opportunity to
talk before the Board. I don't plan to take a lot of your time. I think perhaps
you have my original application, or at least a digest of it, and if you have
that convenient, I'd like to use this draft in conjunction with that.
First of all, so as not to take up too much of your
time, I think perhaps you will agree - or perhaps you won't, you will tell
me that my total PCS and TDY time overseas would count as qualifying
service -- and I've indicated that here as 44 months and 27 days.
We have down here more than that.
MR. FISHER: We have 46 months and 15 days -- so
actually we have given you more than you have asked for. You earned
it -- you had that much.
No, I think mine is an accurate count.
Well, perhaps you have done this -- and this is
what I did -- I calculate that any time you take a TDY, at least in my own
experience you don't go out cold and you don't come back and forget about
the whole thing. You go through a good deal of preparation, and planning,
and briefing, and discussing and outlining what your goals are, and when
you come back you write reports and brief people when you decide what it
was that you saw out there you thought was important to record for the record.
25X1A
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/08/4P78-03092A001100100002-4
 25X1 Approved For Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-03092AO01100100002-4
Next 1 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-03092AO01100100002-4
 Approved-irdr Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-0Q02A001100100002-4
SECRET
or whatever. I have claimed 25X1A
there six months under the best case, or if you're counting sort of day
by day I've counted two and a half months as qualifying time.
I then turn to my time in what is known as OSA.
At that time it was DPD of the DD/P. I have listed 12 months for the
total time because I felt that is the 12 months which count. I dnn't want
to again go into what I went into at fairly great length in my initial application,
but that was a time when this was clearly a foreign operation. There was no
doubt about it, U-2's were flying over China and Cuba for an extended period
of time. While this doesn't necessarily count for much, there's an old
saying, with that and 15 cents you have a cup of coffee. At that time I
was in this building seven days a week and sometimes twice on those days,
and answering phone calls at all hours of the day and night. Frankly it
was very physically wearing and taxing. I don't know that I would like
to go through that again. But I did it. If you would call that in support of
foreign operations- I'd say it would have to be, but then I would have
to concede that I did not exercise tradecraft during this time except during
those trips overseas.
MR. FISHER: I was going to make the point that before we
can even consider anything it has to be in support of clandestine operations,
but that that in itself is not qualifying. We then go to the nature of your
personal involvement. Again, I know the job, and I know the officers and
people who worked around the clock every time these things were in the air.
So far we don't feel it involved tradecraft. But I think I know the job -
I think all of us know the job of the security officer working out of
headquarters on that operation. And you have nothing special to add to
that, right? in terms of unique tradecraft that you were practicing?
I
in time in the United States when I was directly in touch
D
25X1A
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/oSfiC JETRDP78-03092A001100100002-4
I'd have to concede except for those points
 Approver Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-Q92A001100100002-4
MR. FISHER: Well, the overseas you have already gotten
but if I added up the days there, there wouldn't be (much).
I would also - and I hope you don't consider this
simply flimsy, because I think it's rather important. There's a section a,
I believe,
and it talks about hazardous duty. I personally
There were a few TDY's in the country
feel it got to be rather hazardous to the health of the individual to work
seven days a week, to get up every second hour during the night to answer
the telephone, with calls about couriers being stuck here or there, or
problems of one sort or another. But I don't feel conscience-stricken in
claiming it.
Then if you turn to line 5, I have claimed time when
I was security officer in NE Division. Perhaps you have had other people
who have been those officers, and I'm sure many of the duties I had were
similar to many others had. I feel the whole time ought to be counted
because it was clearly in support of foreign operations. I exercised trade-
craft on and off - not every day but very frequently, and on very many
occasions, and for very many different things.
MR. FISHER: I'd like to stop you there for a second.
First of all, during this period what cover were you under?
During this time I was under official
MR. FISHER: Can you give us some examples of how you--
To begin with, I assume you had an office here in this building.
MR. FISHER: Can you give us a couple of for instances of
how you practiced tradecraft in terms of-- And I'm talking about
stringent tradecraft to protect your personal cover.
31
0
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/08/ - DP78-03092AO01100100002-4
 Approver Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-q 92A001100100002-4
If I could talk about the second case I
dealt with specifically, and that is--
MR. FISHER: This is all a break-out under 5 ?
Well, I can speak to each of them individually,
because some of them are rather similar. There was one particular
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
MR. FISHER: Did you feel you were with him to protect
him or to be sure that he didn't do something that he ought not do --
I felt I was with him to protect him,
to prevent him - perhaps not physically restraining him but to prevent
him from doing anything that was inimical to the interest of the United
States, or really to prevent his being in touch with any
MR. FISHER: What were the living arrangements?
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
32
Approved For Release 2002/0tt RDP78-03092AO01100100002-4
 25X1 Approved For Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-03092AO01100100002-4
Approved For Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-03092AO01100100002-4
 Approvedr Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-00 2A001100100002-4
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
SECRE
a DD/P case officer in that area of the world, so there was no real reason
why I couldn't do it. So for that time I calculated 30 days.
And these were trips out of town to see her,
or something of that sort?
Yes, trips out of town to
or to I --t -- or sometimes her coming to this area -- but at all
times my
she was doing --
Essentially you were just reporting on how
Well, as
attached to this, I was her case officer for 27 months.
She was a type ?
I I Yes.
MR. FISHER: You're saying 30 days. You don It have
that here. You have one here for six weeks. I am now going by your
sheet. Am I missing it?
No. When I say 30 days, I literally
went through it and I tried to see how many days, because it would be like
two or three days at a time. It was spread out. I saw her at least
quarterly. So when I finally boiled it down, I called it 30 days. So
doing it that way, it comes out --
Then I sort of summarized and bundled together
various other cases. There were at least three different occasions when
and take them around to show them the sights in the city or answer some
of their questions. "
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
34
Approved For Release 2002/08/Z6 , P78-03092A001100100002-4
OLT
 25X1 Approved For Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-03092AO01100100002-4
Approved For Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-03092AO01100100002-4
 Approved4 r Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-0 2A001100100002-4
calculating this on a very narrow basis I would say that seven months would
be the time which I would call qualifying for this period. Adding up the
various weeks, or giving it a broader scope or broader horizon I say it
ought to be four years and two months,.because there was no telling when,
during this whole tenure in NE Division, when I would have to act using
tradecraft, act in assisting operations, act in a way that could be hazardous
to my own well being -- and I was quite prepared to do it, and I did it, and I
think I did it to the best of my ability. But that really isn't the point. The
point I am trying to make, I feel the whole time ought to count, but I feel
at the very least seven months of that time ought to count as qualifying time.
MR. FISHER: Well, we won't quibble right now. We will
have to discuss it. I think some of it is clearly good, and some of it in
my opinion is clearly not. But let's go on, because the meat of it is really
Then line 6. I returned to the DD/S
and the office where I was chief of that office for a period of time. I
mentioned that while in the assignment I was required or obliged - or it
25X1A
25X1A
25X1 C
36
Approved For Release 2002/08/ jftF1DP78-03092A001100100002-4
 Approved+Gdr Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-0%02A001100100002-4
Et
Another thing - and you can't say typical, because
this happens occasionally -- Mr. Helms came out to visit us in June 1970,
and he indicated or my office in Washington indicated that he wanted to
most efficient way, because
and in order to use his time in the best or
is so sprawling, he would like to
travel by air. So I did a number of dry runs, if you will, myself, in
25X1 C
25X1A
25X1
to that area. I'll admit Mr. Helms put himself in a security risk but I
don't think that detracts from the fact that I shared that risk with him
had it myself.
realize other people do it and I think you should be equally considerate of
them when it's consistently of long duration, when it's frequent --
MR. FISHER: We are concerned about negated insurance,
I certainly would agree with you there.
And then, gentlemen, I would like to
withdraw my request for the computation of headquarters time. In
re-thinking it I can't really see that it falls within the Regulations.
So therefore when I calculated- And I hope my
arithmetic is right. I think my qualifying time under the best circumstances,
if you accept all of the time, I'm claiming eleven years. And I counted
under the worst case that I can calculate, based on my reading of the
37
SE
Approved For Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-03092AO01100100002-4
25X1 C
25X1 C
 Approve or Release 2002/08/26: CIA-RDP78-QV92A001100100002-4
SECRET
Regulation, is six years and two months -- which would seem to take me
beyond the 60 months that I need for CIARDS.
O
One thing you didn't go into. Under this
office you have 70% of work in direct support of overseas
operations, and I think we need a little more information on that.
Even assuming that we said yes to when you
that that was hazardous, then you go on and
say 70%, and that's what I have trouble with.
MR. FISHER: Again, Jack - and I know I have repeated
this a couple of times, but the support of foreign operations by itself is not
38
25X1A
25X1A
25X1 C
25X1 C
Approved For Release 2002/0$C fsk!RDP78-03092A001100100002-4
 Approvedjor Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-p92A001100100002-4
SECRET
25X1 C
And these many flights I mentioned, and
support in accompanying foreign participants in this IDEALIST --
MR. FISHER: But they were official liaison participants--
Official liaison, probably, for the most
part. And I realize I had made one other point in my initial application,
which I suppose is moot and I know you can't rule on, and that is my original
incorporation in the Career Staff of CIA. I hope of course I won't be taking
it up because I hope I won't be making an appeal.
do you have any questions ?
No, I think he has covered his case very well.
MR. FISHER: He has already answered all these questions
I was going to ask him.
Did you have any questions, Jack? or Jay?
MR. FISHER: Thank you very much,
1 -1
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
meeting at this point . . .
MR. FISHER: Well, I must say he handled himself very
nicely. Again, for the Board, with me he did bring up things like he
feels, almost like Marchetti, that the Agency has breached its contract
with him, that when he signed up for the Career Service he offered to give
his all for the Agency and the Agency offered to provide Whim these benefits,
Yes, official
that was
Approved For Release 2002/0SE : RDP78-03092A001100100002-4
 Approved~or Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-O92A001100100002-4
SECRET
one of which he considers membership in the CIA System. I tried to say
that membership in the CIARDS is a matter of statute and requires
qualifying service, and it does not go to everybody. He still isn't quite
convinced that that is true.
1 -1
But it doesn't automatically imply - to
me, anyway - that you are authorized to retire at age 46. It's a career
benefit, to me, and a career means going to more than age 46.
MR. FISHER: He also almost separately said that he
would really challenge the Director's final authority in terms of who should
be in the System. And I said I thought the statute is relatively clear on
that, and that one man had seen fit -- and this was the wrong thing to say --
had seen fit to get in touch with a lawyer. I had in mind
25X1A
25X1A
sai d - "Well, if I was going to do it I wouldn't hire a Wall 25X1A
Street lawyer. " And then he immediately said, "I am not threatening --
I have no intention of going to court on this. " He did ask for a
transcript of the Board meeting -- which we explained to him we couldn't
give out, really, that it would be very inhibiting to the Board to have a
full discussion if we turned this transcript over to the people involved --
and the OGC I think supported us on that. An indication of what if
any of the service claimed as qualifying was accepted- Although
frankly we had such a perfunctory review of his case that it would have
been a little difficult --
0
But it's easier now.
MR. FISHER: I think it's a lot easier to decide that now,
25X1A
and I think we have to address ourselves to: (Reading from memo from 25X1A
I
concerning the selection of personnel for participation in CIARDS from the
time of passage of the CIA Retirement Act and its implementation up to the
present time. " And I explained to him that other than the letter
Approved For Release 2002/08/iECajP78-03092AO01100100002-4
"All instruction and guidance from higher authority in CIA
 Approver Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-0J,92A001100100002-4
SECRET
from Colonel White which opened things up in 1969 -- and which we would
be happy to show him -- there had been no particular guidance other
than oral presentations by the Director in which he said he thought by and
large the Board was doing things properly, and the guidelines or definitions
used by the Retirement Board to determine qualifying service are those
has been advised that that is it. 25X1A
They are broad, they are subjective -- we are doing the best we can with
them. And then he was hitting the 1969 decision - that is, what is the
criteria currently and what was different criteria which might have been
used in the past -- he meant the June 30, 1969 memo. Again, he has
been a gentleman about it but he just doesn't accept that you can change
your mind from time to time.
I think we have to remember if he does stay
around he will probably be back in here when he thinks he has added a
little more time -- so our record had better be fairly clear on that.
MR. FISHER: Whether we use his figure that he requires
17 more months-- He's saying 15 more months, I guess, and we're
really saying 46 and a half months with --
With 13 and a half to go.
MR. FISHER: Yes, with 13 and a half to go.
Now I don't know how precise we've been - or have
to be. The planning and the preparation and doing reports after you
get back to your desk, we just never have considered, nor do we think
we should start doing it.
I don't have too much problem with saying the three
I And
]is okay. Nor that the two weeks
- It might be questionable, but we could give him the
The three weeks using the
41
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/08 C f IEi 2DP78-03092A001100100002-4
 Approvedor Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-t,,92A001100100002-4
SECRET
I don't see as qualifying at all. I think it was just fairly routine
investigative work.
I
MR. FISHER: The DPD time, I think even he under his
worst case assumes nothing, and I'm inclined to agree with him.
The NE Division time, assuming that he has tried
to give us everything that he knows, I certainly could go along with the
five weeks.
The next one is with the gal?
MR. FISHER: The man from
MR. FISHER: He was the one he stayed with, using
to sort of keep him out of trouble and see that he didn't in a
You know, I can lean and say even that certainly
required a degree of tradecraft. I could even lean on the woman without
quibbling too much.
nothing. I think we have been through that one before.
D
Locating and appraising safe houses in
1 -1
-- I don't think we have ever considered that qualifying.
Secret Service duty we have not considered -- and protecting foreign
nationals we have not given it on. So we come down really to the
19 months as being the guts of it. Because up to this point we're talking
about maybe 16 weeks - or less than three months. So we're still
looking for ten months. I don't even feel that we have to quibble about
the
-- we certainly have
never given that as hazardous duty. I'd like to think the
42
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1 C
'25X1 C
Approved For Release 2002/084+Jk-DP78-03092A001100100002-4
 Approvec,or Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-Q92A001100100002-4
SECRET
maintenance programs are just as good as the civilian-- The Director
25X1 C
So how we can find ten months of this
I just don't see it. Now does anybody feel that it is there ?
No, I don't.
I can get him to four months and a week--
Yes, four months and a week.
And that's it! I can get him back down
to about nine months required, but that is as far as I can get.
MR. FISHER: We're not talking as much about it as we
might because we've been all through it a couple of times -- and I'd like
to think we have all done our homework.
D
There are no grounds for it.
MR. FISHER: There is really no new information in this
piece of paper. I just can't see it. Well, I'm quite sure he will
appeal.
Okay, I'm ready for a motion, I believe.
Move that it be disallowed.
Second.
I
MR. FISHER: Next,
really did her no great service because it left us really
basing it pretty much on compassion -- and the fact that these two are
left with a $17, 000 income and a $3600 a year mortgage, really doesn't
tell us very much about the hardship of it. On the other hand, the
latest memo does address itself to the fact that she is a GS-6 doing a
fine job. And I would have to admit as Director of Personnel that we
43
Approved For Release 2002/08Mr' RIDP78-03092A001100100002-4
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
This motion was then unanimously carried . . .
 Approve,or Release 2002/08/26 : CIA-RDP78-(,92A001100100002-4
EGRET
continue to have a difficult time hiring people at this level. I would be
strongly motivated in this case to go along with the one year extension
request for this GS-6 woman based really on operational requirements
and the difficulty to replace her. I don't have too much trouble with it.
. . . Motion was then made and passed that Mrs.
be given a one year extension . . .
. . . The meeting adjourned at 3:45 p.m.
. .
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002108?~6c k&--IQDP78-03092AO01100100002-4 Rif V