HEARINGS BY SPECIAL SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE ON H. R. 9853 TO ESTABLISH A NATIONAL COMMISSION ON THE CLASSIFICATION AND PROTECTION OF INFORMATION

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP83B00823R000800120013-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 6
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: April 16, 2001
• Sequence Number: 13
• Publication Date: March 15, 1972
• Content Type: MFR

15 March 1972
OSD Declassification/Release
Instructions on File
SUBJECT: Hearings by Special Subcommittee on Intelligence on
Approved For Release01/09/03: CIA-RDP83B00823R00~8 O Q 130346
H. R U53 to Establish a. National Commission on
the classification and protection of Information
. 1. The Special Subcommittee on Intelligence of the House Armed
Services Committee, chaired by Representative Nedzi, continued its
hearings on H. R. 9853. On 9 March, Mr. Joseph Liebling, Deputy
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Security Policy), testified and Mr. Fred
Buzhardt, General Counsel, Department of Defense, continued his
testimony. On 13 March, Mr. Ralph Erickson, Assistant Attorney
General, Office of Legal Counsel, Department of Justice, testified. Mr.
Office of Security, and the undersigned were in attendance
at both hearings.
2. Mr. Liebling presented a statement: on current major security
policies and practices within DOD; actions taken and proposed to improve
the DOD security program; and future actions to meet the objectives
of the new Executive Order on classification and declassification. He
listed major changes taken by DOD during the past year resulting from
extensive reviews of its security practices and procedures. The classifica-
tion program was considerably tightened through the reduction of individuals
authorized to classify Top Secret and the declassification of large volumes
of classified documents. He also noted the apparent effectiveness of the
DOD moratorium on the further acquisition of filing cabinets. He outlined
briefly the DOD personnel security program. The total cost of personnel
investigations for FY 1971 was $53, 615, 038. This included 1, 151, 496
NAC's at $5. 44 each and 184, 154 background investigations at an average
cost of $268 each. As the result of the President's directive in June 1971,
DOD had reduced TS clearances by 31% and if maintained, this would result
in saving $7 million over future years. The Subcommittee complimented
Mr. Liebling on a comprehensive statement.
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP83B00823R000800120013-3
 Approved For Relea ,12001/09/03 : CIA-RDP83B00823R000j.120013-3
3. The Chairman continued his questioning of Mr. Buzhardt covering
Mr. Buzhardt's opening statement before the Subcommittee. Mr. Buzhardt
acknowledged that the new Executive Order is vague in certain areas. He
related how DOD would implement the Order and felt that the DOD approach
would be shared by the other departments and agencies. As to the merits
of H. R. 9853, Mr. Buzhardt did not feel. a permanent Commission was
necessary since the Interagency Classification Review Committee, com-
prised of State, Defense, Justice, AEC, CIA and NSC Staff, and created
under the new Executive Order, will basically perform the same function.
When questioned by the Chairman as to which would prevail, a statute or
an Executive Order, Mr. Buzhardt had to acknowledge that the statute
would supersede. For an example, Mr. Buzhardt noted the Atomic Energy
Act exclusively provides for the protection and handling of Restricted Data
and such information is totally excluded from the new Executive Order.
4. Mr. Erickson, in his statement, presented the legal basis for
Executive action to classify information. The authority rests on a con-
stitutional Executive power and is not statutory, though statutes have
recognized this authority. He acknowledged the problems stem from over-
classification or maintaining a classification longer than necessary.
Mr. Erickson stated the position of Justice, that if the new Executive
Order is faithfully implemented, it should solve most of the problems and
the Commission under H. R. 9853 would be duplicative. He felt that Congress
should exercise fully its normal oversight responsibilities and if the
problems are not resolved, then perhaps a Commission such as proposed
in H. R. 9853 might warrant consideration.
5. The Chairman asked Mr. Erickson whether there were any
provisions that Justice desired in the new Order which the White House
rejected. Mr. Erickson could recall none. A discussion followed on
several possible problems with the Order such as: The possible pro-
liferation of the number of persons authorized to classify Confidential;
concern that the term damage to "national security" might be extended
to include surely domestic matters; the permitted access by former
Government officials to information which they originally classified; the
lack of clear requirements that an originator sign his name to a document;
and the lack of any sanctions. In regard to the latter, Mr. Erickson
noted the deficiencies in the espionage :Laws and that the Administration
has been studying the problem through the Brown Commission and the
codification of the criminal laws under Title 18. He indicated that specific
proposals resulting from these studies should be made in the near future.
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 :. gIA-RDP83B00823R000800120013-3
 Approved For Releas01/09/03 : CIA-RDP83B00823R0008,0 20013-3
6. The hearings will continue with Mr. Buzhardt continuing
and witnesses from other agencies and outside groups to be called.
Distribution:
Orig - H. R. 9853
1-OGC
.Y- Director Security
Approved For Release 2001/09/0'3 CIA-RDP83B00823R000800120013-3
 Approved For ei se 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP83B008 0800120013-3
Nedzi Questions to DOD
1. What are the names of the 12 departments and agencies
which will have original Top Secret classification authority under
the new Order?
2. Which of the Executive Offices will have similar authority?
Will PFIAB?
3. What is the difference between "need-to-know" and
"required for official duties"?
4. How many Top Secret clearances are there in each of the
armed services?
5. Do you have any automatic - of clearances
procedures?
6. How often do you reinvestigate people with clearances?
How far behind are you in this program?
7. How can the Congress have input in helping you solve
the problems of classification, declassification and protection of
classified material?
8. Did the White House accept all of DOD input into the
Executive Order? Which items were not accepted?
9. What do you think of a Panama Canal Company employee
who has a Top Secret clearance and is preparing a paper on the
repair and maintenance of the Panama Canal locks asking a military
Commander in the area for a Top Secret document to assist him in
his report and taking one sentence from that document and then
classifying the entire 90 page document Top Secret? In other words,
how do you handle the derivative classification?
10. Don't you believe that the requirement in the Executive
Order to separately classify each p :ragraph of a document would
give aid to the opposition since Up the opposition got access to
the document they would be able to pinpoint those paragraphs which
are extremely sensitive?
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP83B00823R000800120013-3
 Approved Fo+c.P?~ase 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP83B0080800120013-3
11. Who is authorized to speak for the President in the
implementation of this Order?
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP83B00823R000800120013-3
 Appr
Appr
wed
UNCLASSIFIED CONK NTIAL
ECRET
OFFICIAL ROUTING SLIP
TO
NAME AND ADDRESS
DATE
INITIALS
R
ZO"'g A
xw
2
,,7 !?
4
3MAR19
5
r
CTION
DIRECT REPLY
PREPARE REPLY
APPROVAL
DISPATCH
RECOMMENDATION
COMMENT
FILE
RETURN
CONCURRENCE
INFORMATION
SIGNATURE
Remarks :
FOLD HERE TO RETURN TO SENDER
FROM: NAME. ADDRE
DATE
Y...i- 3Y.fLaI.0f7V Mar
19
NMI
FORM NO, 237 Use previous editions
1-67 I