INPUT TO THE DCI'S ANNUAL REPORT

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80M00596A000200020011-1
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 16
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 19, 2004
• Sequence Number: 11
• Publication Date: November 13, 1978
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Release 2004/07/08 : SIEg ON100596A000200020011-1
OLC 78-347/10
13 November 1978
MEMORANDUM FOR: I
FROM
Acting Legislative Counsel
SUBJECT : Input to the DCI's Annual Report
REFERENCE : Your Memo dtd 18 October 1978 (DCI/IC 78-1199)
Acting Director, o icy Guidance Office
I
As requested in reference, attached is the Office of Legislative
Counsel's input to the DCI's Annual Report to the President and Congress.
Tabs A-E correspond to the questions posed in paragraph 3 of reference.
Should you or
Attachments:
As Stated
of my staff
have any further questions, please contact
25X1
UNCLASSIFIED WHEN
SEPARATED FROM
ATTACHMENTS
SECRET
25X1
Approved For Release 2004/07/08 : CIA-RDP80M0059so000200020011-1
 Approved For Release 2004/07/08 : CIA-RDP80M00596A000200020011-1
Approved For Release 2004/07/08 : CIA-RDP80M00596A000200020011-1
 Approved For Release 2 SA 7RL CIA-RDP80M00596A000200020011-1
SUMMARY OF 1978 ACTIVITIES OF SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON
INTELLIGENCE
The Committee began its second full year with 17 full Members, up
two from 1977, plus the Senate Majority and Minority leaders who are
ex-officio Members. In addition, it has a staff of 30 professionals with
an additional 19 nonprofessionals. Citing his belief that SSCI Chairmanship
should be rotated regularly, Senator Inouye resigned the Chairmanship.
Senator Birch Bayh was appointed the new Chairman and will serve
through 1980. The Committee began the year with public hearings on
the President's nomination of Ambassador Carlucci as Deputy Director
of Central Intelligence.
The Committee's major concerns for 1978 were as follows:
Intelligence Charters
A major step in fulfilling a principal recommendation
of the Church Committee that national foreign intelligence
be regulated by new statutory charters was taken when the
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence introduced S. 2525
in February. The 263 page bill was the product of nearly
two years of work by the Committee staff and discussions
with the Executive Branch. The Committee held public
hearings on the bill in April through August, featuring
38 public witnesses, including former DCIs , military
officers with intelligence backgrounds, academicians,
and others.
Electronic Surveillance Legislation
Drawing upon strong Administration support, the
Select Committee, in conjunction with the Senate Judiciary
Committee, considered and favorably reported S. 1566, the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. This bill
was passed by the full Senate by an overwhelming 95-1 vote.
FY-1979 Authorization
The Committee conducted its second annual review of
the National Foreign Intelligence Program, this one for
Fiscal Year 1979. The process began with closed hearings
in February and March at which the DCI as well as individual
program managers testified. The Committee next reported
its judgments on proper spending levels for full Senate
consideration. Senate passage was delayed pending attempts
to resolve with the Senate Armed Services Committee
jurisdictional questions concerning Intelligence Related
Approved For Release 200 ACT-RDP80M00596A000200020011-1
 Approved For Release 2004/07/08SL - UPTOM00596AO00200020011-1
Activities. Although the issue on whether the Armed
Services Committee had sole or shared jurisdiction was
not resolved, an accommodation was reached which
permitted passage of the authorization bill.
The FY-78 authorization bill did not receive House
consideration and therefore, was not enacted. The
FY-79 bill, however, was the subject of a conference
between House and Senate Intelligence Committee
Members, and was approved by the President on
17 September 1978.
Report on Use of Classified Information in Criminal
Prosecutions
The year-long efforts of the Subcommittee on Secrecy
and Disclosure were devoted to studying the problem the
Government has in prosecuting cases in which classified
information may be revealed in court. The Subcommittee's
staff study of nearly 50 leak and espionage cases was
followed by hearings and public testimony from Administration
witnesses, including the DCI and Deputy Attorney General.
One of the principal recommendations of the Subcommittee's
report, issued in October, was for a pre-trial procedure to
be authorized by statute, at which the presiding judge would
determine which information would be presented at trial
and thus available for discovery by defendant and his counsel.
The Subcommittee also did not commit itself on the need for
a major revision of the espionage laws, but did support a
law to further protect intelligence sources and methods.
Major Studies
The Committee completed a number of other major
studies on intelligence issues. These included public
studies entitled: "The National Intelligence Estimates
A-B Team Episode Concerning Soviet Strategic Capability
and Objectives"; "Soviet Oil Situation: An Evaluation of
CIA Analysis of Soviet Oil Production, May 1978";
"Unclassified Summary: Involvement of NSA In Development
of the Data Encryption Standard"; and "Activities of
'Friendly' Foreign Intelligence Services in the U.S. - A
Case Study."
A Study on the Quality of Intelligence on China
(classified), a report of a staff inquiry into Frank Snepp's
allegations, and a study on the Government's reorganization
and capability to counter international terrorism are
nearing completion.
Approved For Release 2004/07S?~R P80M 00596A000200020011-1
 SECRET
Approved For Release 2004/07/ . IA-RDP80M00596A000200020011-1
Upcoming Issues
In calendar year 1979, we can again expect that a
great deal of the Committee's efforts will be devoted
toward developing charters and the FY-1980 authorization
bill. The Committee hopes that the Senate will in 1979
be able to pass comprehensive intelligence charters with
the full support of the Administration. A third major
issue for the Committee during 1979 will be Senate
ratification of a SALT agreement.
Approved For Release 2004/07/08E@ @7P10M00596A000200020011-1
 Approved For Release 2004Ic&ECRI -TDP80M00596A000200020011-1
SUMMARY OF THE 1978 ACTIVITIES OF HOUSE PERMANENT SELECT
COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE
The HPSCI's principal concern during 1978 was organizational
structure, obtaining necessary background and establishing its role
within the House of Representatives. In addition to the 13 full Members,
its staff of 28 includes 14 professionals, many of whom have been
drawn from the Executive Branch.
The Committee's approach has been to assure that the Intelligence
Community is doing its job properly and, when appropriate, to look into
ways and means of improving the quality of the Community activities
either via legislation or improved procedures. During 1978, the
Committee devoted special attention to:
a. A detailed study on warning. The DCI has created
a clear central focus for intelligence warning in the person of
an NIO for Warning.
b. A detailed study and series of hearings on Automatic
Data Processing within the entire Intelligence Community.
c. CIA's relationship with the media. After extensive
hearings, both open and closed, the Committee did not make
any recommendations for new guidelines and the general sense
gleaned from those hearings is that existing guidelines are
adequate to protect the media and the U.S. population from
inappropriate influence by CIA over the media.
d. The Committee looked into the entire covert action
approval process (Presidential Findings, Perspectives) and has
concluded that the approval process as well as the reporting
procedures called for in Hughes-Ryan Amendment are
cumbersome and may inhibit the development of worthy programs.
e. The Committee held several hearings, both open and
closed, on the subject of Intelligence Community coverage and
handling of narcotics and terrorism. In both instances, the
Committee focused on the degree to which the Community may be
precluded from performing as well as it might by a combination
of existing guidelines and interpretations thereof.
f. The Committee looked into the issue of the need for
legislation to better protect sources and methods and is
convinced of the need for such legislation.
Approved For Release 2001`r1-RDP80M00596A000200020011-1
 Approved For Release 2004/OSSVHERDP80M00596A000200020011-1
g. The Committee passed the first Intelligence Community ,.,
Authorization Bill. In conjunction with its authorization
responsibilities, the Committee has initiated a study of HUMINT,
to determine how valuable it really is and whether it is worth
the cost and risks attendant to it.
h. The Committee was very involved in the passage of the
Foreign Electronic Surveillance Bill and was exceedingly helpful
with regard to the Civil Service Bill and the Financial Disclosure
Bill as well as the CIA's special retirement system (CIARDS).
The Committee's first year was devoted to the above activities.
It is probably fair to state that the Committee is well disposed toward
the Intelligence Community and wants to assure itself that the Community
and its several parts are doing their jobs as well as they can and as
efficiently as possible. The Committee also wants to be assured that
Community activities are well within the law as well as to ensure that
applicable legislation is created or modified to enable Community
responsiveness to national security needs.
In the coming 96th session, the HPSCI will devote the bulk of its
time to the following matters:
b. Completion of the Committee's study on the value
c. The degree to which the Community has consolidated 3.)J1
its ADP resources and made the best use of ADP. ,, it,
d. Legislation with regard to: charters and legislation
to protect sources and methods.
e. A study on the estimating, forecasting and trend
analysis process.
f. A study of the effectiveness and adequacy of the
Community's counterintelligence capabilities.
g. The degree to which the DCI has the authorities he needs
,,over the rest of the Intelligence Community to assign priorities
and effectively deal with the Intelligence Community budget.
Approved For Release 2004/07QBLDP80M00596A000200020011-1
 Approved For Release 2004/07/08 : CIA-RDP80M00596A000200020011-1
Approved For Release 2004/07/08 : CIA-RDP80M00596A000200020011-1
 SECRET
Approved For Release 2004/07/08: CIA-RDP80M00596A000,
INTELLIGENCE CHARTER LEGISLATION
The "Intelligence Charter" legislation introduced in early February
was the subject of extensive public hearings and close Administration
scrutiny in preparation for its reintroduction of the 96th Congress. The
SSCI received extensive testimony from former Executive Branch officials,
t
s
academicians, and civil libertarians. The testimony received represen
viewpoints reflecting a wide variety of political beliefs--including former
intelligence officers, the ACLU and so-called "Victims of Intelligence. it
This procedure reflects the position of the sponsors of the legislation,
who stressed on introduction and during the hearings that the bill is
intended to serve as an "agenda for discussion" which will be revised
for reintroduction early in the 96th Congress. The Senate Committee
did not call on any current Administration witnesses. Attendance of
both Senators and the general public was spotty.
Individual Committee members who attended the hearings did admit
to the overl detailed_ approach reflected in the bill as introduced and
opined that the-bilTprobably contains too many reporting requirements.
The House oversight committee held no hearings on the bill, which
was introduced in the House as a formality.
The Administration convened on NSC/SCC Charter Working Group,
which for the past several months has met to deliberate the various G
d
titles in an effort to develop Administration positions. Redrafts an
issue papers on all titles have been submitted to the President and
negotiations with Senate staffers have already been reinitiated.
The SSCI staff is committed to an early reintroduction of the bill and
is looking to completing legislative action on the charters during the 96th
Congress. However, charter legislation will have to vie for early
Congressional attention along with the anticipated SALT Treaty, which is
sure to take up a great part of the first half of the new Congress.
Approved For Release 2004/07/
08 Ip~.~DP80M00596A000200020011-1
 Approved For Release 2004/07/08 : CIA-RDP80M00596A000200020011-1
Approved For Release 2004/07/08 : CIA-RDP80M00596A000200020011-1
 E.CRET
Approved For Release 2004/07 8 : CIA-RDP80M00596A000200020011-1
IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF RELATIONS WITH OTHER CONGRESSIONAL
COMMITTEES DURING 1978
In keeping with the mandate given the DCI by Section 1-601(c) of
Executive Order 12036 to "facilitate the use of national foreign
intelligence products by the Congress in a secure manner," the
Intelligence Community has continued efforts to enhance substantive
intelligence support to the Congress through briefings and through the
provision of both classified and unclassified intelligence assessments.
Special efforts were made during 1978 to acquaint potential Congressional
customers with the variety of unclassified intelligence products available.
For example, for the first nine months of 1978, the CIA alone provided
the Congress over 239 briefings and serviced over 1355 requests for
documents .
The Intelligence Community also supported a number of Congressional
investigative efforts during 1978. These included the House Select
Committee '
probes into
I I a investigation concerning
alleged Nazi war criminals residing in the U. S. by a House Judiciary
Subcommittee, and a Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee investigation
of the activities of foreign intelligence services in the U.S. In addition,
the Intelligence Community cooperated with the Senate Ethics Committee in
its investigations of several instances of unauthorized disclosures of
intelligence information that may have involved the Senate.
Approved For Release 2004/07/x+9 a lP80M00596A000200020011-1
 Approved For Release 2004/07/0$:%~T80M00596A000200020011-1
RELATIONS WITH CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES REGARDING NFIP
AND BUDGET
1978 was a historic year in terms of Congressional authorization
and appropriation of the FY-1979 NFIP budget. On 17 September, the
President signed into law the first annual authorization act for intelligence
and intelligence-related activities (PL 95-370).
The President's signing message cited the Act as symbolizing the
"recent achievements of Congress that broaden and intensify oversight
of intelligence activities through a cooperative effort with the Executive
agencies." He commended the House Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and the House
and Senate Armed Services Committees for their efforts in enhancing
Congressional oversight while minimizing the risks of disclosure of
classified information.
'his new authorization process did not proceed without incident.
The secret aspect of the Act was debated at some length in the House",
SCI C
and lit
o111i111LLee Members assured the House that the decision to .~~.
keep the numbers classified was a temporary decision which would be
reviewed by HPSCI. The President, in his signing message, indicted
that the classified annex to the Act differed from his program in some
important aspects which he felt compelled to have modified in the
appropriation process. He could not, of course, openly discuss the
issues of concern. Finally, when the Appropriation Conference Report
on the NFIP reached the House for a vote, the Chairman of the Program
and Budget Subcommittee of HPSCI made the following statement.
"Mr. Speaker, I have signed the conference
report ' except as to certain intelligence matters.
'
I have done this to express my concern regarding a
portion of the appropriation for the national foreign
intelligence program which is described in a
classified annex to the joint statement. Specifically,
I am distressed that funds for a major technical
program which were authorized for a particular
purpose are now being appropriated for a
different purpose. This has occurred because
conferees accepted a last minute proposal by
the administration which has the effect of
thwarting the clear intention of authorization.
This could not have been done in public because
such action was clearly subject to a point of order.
Despite the substantial progress this year in
congressional oversight of intelligence, these
actions trammel the authorization process and
cause me to question whether our control of
intelligence has yet reached maturity.
Approved For Release 2004/%/ Cfll1DP8OMOO596AOOO2OOO2OO1 1-1
 c-srpn
Approved For Release 2004K F46nLA-RDP80M00596A000200020011-1
This creates a dilemma for me. While I
understand fully, and support the need for
confidentiality in these matters, it is
wrong for the administration to take advantage
of secrecy, however necessary, to thwart clear
congressional intent."
The entire Congressional authorization process was characterized
by multiple authorizations, multiple jurisdictional claims among co ittees
and for many collateral issues to be attached to authoriz-afir-in hi
The detailed authorization review by the Congress also put a new
face on the older appropriation process. The Appropriations Committees
in both houses took serious note of authorization decisions, and in the
final analysis, the enacted 1979 NFIP budget in large measure reflects the
decisions made by the authorization Committees and concurred in by
Appropriations.
25X1
Approved For Release 2004/07/
CIP80M00596A000200020011-1
QBL
 Approved For Release 2004/07/08 : CIA-RDP80M00596A000200020011-1
Approved For Release 2004/07/08 : CIA-RDP80M00596A000200020011-1
 25X1 Approved For Release 2004/07/08 : CIA-RDP80M00596A000200020011-1
Next 6 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2004/07/08 : CIA-RDP80M00596A000200020011-1
 ^ UNCLASSIFIED ^ SIN RNAL
EE ON Y
pprove or -
SUBJECT: (Optional)
FROM:
EXTENSION
NO.
OLC 78-347/10
Acting Legislative Counsel
ATE
13 November 1978
TO: (Officer designation, room number, and
building)
DATE
OFFICER'S
COMMENTS (Number each comment to show from whom
RECEIVED
FORWARDED
INITIALS
to whom. Draw a line across column after each comment.)
1.
c in Director, Poli
cy u
ance
Office
2. BW09
CHB
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
FORM 610 USE PREY pprrea{e eas IAL RDP
3-62 EDITIONS LJ
^ CONFIDENTIAL ^ SECRET'
USE ONLY ffj1 U CLASSIFIED
25X1