OGC REQUEST TO EXAMINE CERTAIN CIA DOCUMENTS

Document Type: 
Collection: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
CIA-RDP85B00236R000200070013-2
Release Decision: 
RIPPUB
Original Classification: 
K
Document Page Count: 
2
Document Creation Date: 
December 9, 2016
Document Release Date: 
August 17, 2001
Sequence Number: 
13
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
December 19, 1980
Content Type: 
MFR
File: 
AttachmentSize
PDF icon CIA-RDP85B00236R000200070013-2.pdf107.88 KB
Body: 
ADMDIISTRATIVE - INTERNALU Approved For^,B.elease 2001/09/04: CIA-RDP85B~23,~Y QDD200070013-2 MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD Intelligence Branch THROUGH: C/CRD/Intel THROUGH: C/CRD SUBJECT: OGC Request to Examine Certain CIA Documents 1. On 17 December the undersigned met with of the OGC Law Library who had requested CRD examination o a large group o ocuments which she believed may have been released inadvertently to the public without proper declassification action. Upon examination of the documents, it was determined that no improper release had occurred. 2. The documents were in two groups. The first group was IPD FOIA Case file F-75-6585. This file partially consists of some 321 xeroxed documents which in 1978 had been released to the plaintiff. Although many of the docu- ments were not CIA -- these included sections of the Congressional Record -- there were CIA documents from OLC and OGC which had been classified originally but declassified because of the mandatory request. These documents had had their original classification stamps deleted and marked properly as declassi- fied. Subjectwise, the documents concerned the secret testimony of Admiral Hillenkoe'er before various congressional committees. Many of the documents were advisory memorandums to the DCI from the then Legal Counsel, Mr. Pforzheimer. 3. This CIA response was the near final result of extensive litigation from Susan Goland and involved the CIA claim that the requested documents were not properly Agency, that they were legislative records, and should not fall under the executive purview of the FOIA. This case, as of last spring, was essentially closed awaiting a final court decision concerning payment OfSTATINTL legal fees. 4. The second group of documents was the one that requested a CRD opinion. It consisted of the original CI ocuments, most of Approved For Release USE ON~~00070013-2 ADMINISTRATIVE Appro RNSI + LVEOI/O UBUL F239MOD200070013-2 which formed the basis of the IPD %eroxed package. The documents had come from a variety of sources: some were OLC, others had been retired to AARC and called back. There appeared to be some documents which might have been related to the Goland request, but were not in the IPD package. There appeared to be no documentation acknowledging CIA refusal to release the information. s were written well past the time period of the Goland request. went on to explain that the second group of documents had been used by OGC personnel as a "working file" for legal opinions of that time period. She also stated that there was soon to be an NFAC/OPA person assigned to OGC to write an unclassified paper using the information available to 0GC including the "working file". 5. The writer told that in his opinion there had been no security breach in the release o- any of the documents. I also told her that none of the documents in the second group could be subjected to system- atic review unless the files were placed in correct order by an RMO and properly returned to AARC. In consultation with the IPD case officer most familiar with the Goland request, we also advised that any STATINTL person writing an unclassified version using the documents in question should restrict their research to those documents known to be declassified which were in the IPD case file package. This should be done to avoid the possible use of documents which, while still classified, might be related to the subject of the Goland litigation. 6. The subject of this memorandum will be promulgated in the form of a draft Classification Review Procedure (CRP) to advise CRO personnel who might come across similar related documents in their systematic review of old Agency records. Approved I TiA i4. cf - 00 0 L~70013-2 2