MINUTES TWO HUNDRED AND SIXTY-NINTH MEETING WEDNESDAY, 29 JUNE 1983, 1000 - 1135 HOURS ROOM 4E64, LANGLEY HEADQUARTERS BUILDING

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 11
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: November 19, 2010
• Sequence Number: 7
• Publication Date: June 29, 1983
• Content Type: MISC

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
0
A
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE
Security Committee
SECRET
29 June 1983
Minutes
Two Hundred and Sixty-ninth Meeting
Wednesday, 29 June 1983, 1000 - 1135 Hours
Room 4E64, Langley Headquarters Building
Chairman
Presiding
MEMBERS PRESENT
Mr. Robert C. Allen, Department of the Navy
Mr. Maynard Anderson, Office of the Secretary of Defense
Mr. James Callahan, Office of the Secretary of the Air Force
Central Intelligence Agency
Col. George J. Mercuro, Department of the Air Force
Defense Intelligence Agency
Mr. D. u ino, epartment of Justice
ALTERNATES PRESENT
National Security Agency
Mr. Frank Dill, epar ment of the Army
Mr. Dan Downum, Federal Bureau of Investigation
Central Intelligence Agency
fense Intelligence Agency
Mr. Roger D. Smith, Department of the Air Force
ALSO PRESENT
Mr. Gerald L. Berkin, Department of the Navy
Central Intelligence Agency
Mr. Kenneth rosher, Department of State
Central Intelligence Agency
Tonal Security Agency
entral Intelligence Agency
Mr. Dona igers, Department of State
Executive Secretary
SECOM Staff
SECRETI
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
Preliminary Comments
1. Welcomed) as the new DIA member, and noted that
he brought extensive experience to the assignment.
2. Advised that the DCI spoke to the Armed Forces Policy Council on
20 June about damaging consequences of and measures to be taken to prevent
unauthorized disclosures of intelligence. A similar presentation to the White
House staff on 21 June was the subject of a 11 " in tho 1m, Cannon report
in the 27 June issue of the Washington Post. said he spoke to
Mr. Casey on 23 June about further steps in educating Government officials
to the critical need to stop disclosures. Plans are underway to videotape
Mr. Casey's presentation as a lead-in to talk hv senior security
officers who would field any questions. said several SECOM
members had expressed interest r. asey s presentation delivered to
their departments and agencies.
3. Reported that efforts to draft nondisclosure agreements required by
NSDD-84 continue. said draft agreements were circulated for
comment after the 19 May ISOO meeting, and another meeting was held on 28 June
to discuss changes to those drafts. He advised that we seemed to be losing
ground during the process, as the latest draft seemed weaker than the existing
Form 4193 that most of the Community uses. He noted that political equities
were probably an unavoidable consideration in this effort.
4. Said Fred Wood, the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment
(OTA) action officer responsible for their the polygraph, called him
earlier in June seeking assistance. noted that Mr. Wood
volunteered comment that several persons he spoke to expressed the opinion that
the Administration wants to use the polygraph to choke off undesired "leaks,"
but wouldn't use it in cases where information was "leaked" to support an
Administration objective. He assured Mr. Wood that SECOM's objective was to
prevent the disclosure of legitimate national security information. A copy of
the 1980 Personnel Security Survey done under SECOM auspices was sent to
Mr. Wood in response to his request for data. mentioned the
DDCI's wish to be kept abreast of developments concerning this or any other
polygraph study, with particular regard to contacts on the subject with Commun-
ity agencies. He asked members to bring pertinent information to his attention.
5. Noted that the Personnel Security Subcommittee was still on the hook
to complete for SECOM consideration a draft set of parameters for a validity
study of the polygraph by the Community. said the actual
study probably could not be complete while u y was in progress.
2
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
6. Stated his appreciation for the forthcoming attitude on the part of
several members that result o fill all three of the vacant
subcommittee chairmanships. noted that three officers were
nominated to chair the Physics ecuri y Working Group, and that he had
selected Jerry Berkin, of Navy, who brought an exceptionally broad background
in security to the task, to serve as chairman. thanked the
State member for proposing two experienced officers for this post, and for
offering support for t of the phys' ity officers seminar.
He next advised tha had nominate to chair y
Awareness Subcommittee, and tha to
chair the Personnel Security Subcommittee. sai o
nominees had impressive experience in the ie s invo ve , and stated that he
would like to designate them as chairmen of these subcommittees unless members
wished to offer other nomi tions or bjections. There being none, the
designations were concluded this discussion by noting
that he had called to express appreciation for his service with
the Security Awareness body. a asked the incumbent chairmen of the Personnel
Security and Security Awareness Subcommittee nge the transition with
their successors and advise the SECOM staff.
7. Reported that he and met with Miss Page, Deputy Director
of the IC Staff, to discuss the ECOM budget request which the SSCI
proposed to cut severely (leaving us with only about She
agreed to support the SECOM reclama. said he hoped the
Senate Committee would resider its position and agree with the HPSCI to
fund our full request.
8. Noted that he had asked members at the April m tino to iew and
comment on the proposed FY 1985 budget submission. said
mPmharc ciinnorted our request, totaling in base level items and
in new initiatives. He e IC Staff had instructed us
o re uce the request to a total of - a cut of 68% - with the
revised request due to the IC Staff by July. He invited attention to
copies at members' places of our proposed submission, and asked members to
provide timely, comments on those items which they would like to see included
9. Said we had provided the IG/CM secretariat the second
draft of their countermeasure organization study. oted
that, as was the case with the first draft, most o our comments were on
technical security matters. He invited attendees who held copies of the two
drafts, and who would like copies of, the SECOM responses, to contact the staff
and request copies of our responses.
10. Advised that the draft revision of DCID 1/7 had been sent to Walt
Elder with a request to issue it as a DCID rather than as an implementer.
Mr. Elder agreed, and will send the document, reformatted as a DCID, back to
the staff for proofreading. The result will probably not bear a number until
a new numbering system is developed. The exception for us will be DCID 1/14,
which Mr. Elder agreed should retain its original designation because
established status in litigation and other uses outside the Community.
3
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
11. Noted that a new group on computer security, called the ELINFOSEC
Minimum Standards Ad Hoc Group, was established on 24 June at the instance of
and Dr. Ruth Davis. The group, chaired by of the IC
a wi Gene Epperly of OSD as deputy, is tasked to review electronic
information security standards, safeguards and requirements in Government and
industry (e.g., bank safeguards for electronic fund transfers), and develop a
set of standards as a preliminary policy for minimum application to Community
computer networks. These standards will focus on "critical" systems that
process, store or transmit intelligence. Part of the ad. oup's effort
will be to identify systems considered to be "critical."
12. Stated that of the staff was in California reviewing and
evaluating a contractors emons ration of a technique developed under an
Office of Research and Development contract to help identify sensitive docu-
ments which have been misused. said the technique's applica-
bility is one aspect being reviewed by
13. Reported that this was Col. Mercuro's last SECOM meeting, he being
reassi serve as Inspector General at Patrick Air Force
Base. asked that the record show his special thanks to
Col. ercuro or is active and constructive support of the Committee as a
member, and particularly for his outstanding performance as chairman of the
Compartmentation Subcommittee. Col. Mercuro said he had enjoyed his asso-
ciation with SECOM. He hoped to ease the disappointment of departure by
organizing the first annual Mercuro Open Golf Tournament next December.
ITEM 1 Approval of Minutes
In the absence of requests for chance. the minutes of the 25 May 1983
meeting were approved as written.
ITEM 2 Subcommittee Reports
A. Physical Security reported that the Physical Security
Working Group (PSWG) met on June to complete arrangements for the first
seminar r Community physical security officers, scheduled for 8-12 August at
working group mem ers as the first "class." Four seminars are pro-
gramme tor calendar 1984. said most speakers have been lined up,
with the remainder to be arrange shortly. He said the members would critique
the presentations at the first running, and make adjustments as needed. He
stated the working group will cover physical security matters for intelligence
in general, not just SCI. The Community will be invited to nominate attendees
at subsequent runnings of the seminar.
B. Personnel Security reported on the Personnel Security
Subcommittee 22 June meeting. They discussed the tenth running of the adju-
dicators' seminar, scheduled for 15-19 August. Nominations are to be provided
the SECOM staff in writing no later than 15 July, and are to give
each nominee's name ana i e, SSN, work address and clearance status.
said they also discussed arranging one or two short (i.e., two
4
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
or three days) conferences for personnel security managers on behavioral
sciences and legal issues bearing on personnel security, as suggested by
said subcommittee members believed there was a
need tor and interest in such a conference. The members indicated agreement
with the concept. He aske for guidance on how to proceed.
described the results of subcommittee deliberations on the
proposed addition to the draft revision of DCID 1/14.
C. Security Advisory Group reported that he had returned
from Moscow the previous evening. He said t e Department of State had estab-
lished an Embassy Construction Coordinating Committee (MC3) to address matters
such as space allocation, secure rooms and moving of equipment in the new
embassy. He advised that brickwork on the chancery building was up to the
sixth floor, but that utility lines were far behind schedule. Work on the
housing units is almost finished. He said he doubted that the scheduled 1985
completion date would be met. summarized the stop-work order, the
Soviet walk-off and return and actions concerning technical security inspec-
tion equipment. He advised that the technical countermeasure effort for the
new building has been well supported by the Community (especially CIA and
NSA), and he expressed his appreciation for the rapport developed between mid-
level personnel from the agencies involved. oted his concern
about possible responses to requests from friendly countries for advice from
the U. S. on what they should do and not do to secure their own buildings. He
stated that this issue had been referred to the Assistant Secretary of State
for Administration for consideration. In response to questions from members,
he advised that about 25 SeaBees were on-site in Moscow, and that an average
of eight to ten security specialists would be there for at least another year.
D. Technical Surveillance Countermeasures I (reported that most
of their recent meeting was taken up with discussions on the response to be
made t draft IG/CM countermeasure study. compli-
for the quality and timeliness of his work on that response.
summarized negotiations with GSA about construction of the expanded
ITC facilities. He noted that GSA's cost estimate had been unacceptably high,
and that they were now out of the picture. He advised that arrangements had
been made with the architect GSA had originally retained to carry the project
forward. The current estimate calls for construction to cost about $400,000
plus about $56,000 for the architect's fee (includes construction monitoring).
The design review is scheduled for mid-July, with construction to start in
ITEM 3 DCID 1/14 Revision
noted dissemination to members of four alternatives
on language to be added to the DCID revision to address the SCI access eli-
gibility of persons determined to have disclosed classified information to
those not authorized to receive it. He advised that Air Force, Army, CIA,
DIA, Energy, FBI, NSA, Navy, SAFSS and Treasury had voted for the SECOM
version; Mr. Anderson had voted for the OSD version, but advised that if his
5
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
SECRET
alternative was not supported by the majority, he would vote for the SECOM
staff ver for the CIA alternative, and Justice for the UDIS
proposal. said he would like this matter to go forward as an
agreed position so the NFIC could concentrate on the policy division con-
cerning duration of investigative coverage. Messrs. Stigers and Rubino said
they would support th staff alternative, thus making the action
unanimous. complimented Col. Press for the clarity and
snec ty with w is a supported the SECOM alternative for the Army.
ITEM 4 Proposed Security Awareness Subcommittee Charter
noted that copies of the proposed charter had been sent
to members w' nda. He advised that NSA had suggested minor changes
requested
agreed to
be postp
members.
airman-designate of the subcommittee. Members
Jrecommendation that SECOM action on this charter
has had a chance to discuss it with subcommittee
ITEM 5 New Business
1. invited attention to copies at members' places of
a unanimous recommendation by the Unauthorized Disclosures Investigations
Subcommittee that SECOM members nominate a person to spend a month with the
SECOM staff to ct a limited study of unauthorized disclosures of intel-
ligence. aid the proposed method was to take information available
in Community agency logs of "leaks" to try to determine (1) where classified
information leaks came from; (2) which media vehicles were principally
involved; and (3) what subjects were most frequently subject to disclosure.
The object would be to use the results to ensure that security resources are
applied to the areas of greatest risk. The results would provide hard facts
ange "conventional wisdom" on the three areas involved.
said this effort would support such efforts as the package
g ra a now to request Justice to cause the FBI to investigate a "leak"
in Aviation Week, with the seriousness of the situation to be demonstrated by
a listing of the numerous other "leaks" of intelligence in the same magazine
during recent years. Col. Mercuro spoke in favor of the proposal as a useful
start. and others indicated their support. In response to Mr.
request for provision of an officer , Mr.
said he thought he would be able to do so. and Mrs
aid they would consider providing officers rom their agencies.
2. asked for guidance on whether the National Security Council
Staff should be invited to sit on the UDIS. Mr. Anderson and
noted potential problems involved in doing so. No members supported is, an
the issue was dropped from consideration. Members also discussed and rejected
possible representation on the UDIS by the ISOO staff. Mr. Stigers noted that
any needed ACDA representation probably could b arranged through the
Department of State on an adhoc basis.
6
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
SECREI~
DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE
Security Committee
13 July 1983
NOTE FOR: Members, DCI Security Committee
Chairmen, SECOM Subcommittees
SUBJECT: SECOM Minutes
Please replace page 7 of SECOM-M-269, dated 29 June 1983 with
corrected version as attached.
UNCLASSIFIED When Separated
From Attachment
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
3. advised that all 11 responses received on the
proposed data elements to be used by Community agencies to record in their
files common items of information on unauthorized disclosures were supportive,
but Mr. Anderson's concurrence was highly qualified. Mr. Anderson replied
that the OSD element which would be involved had asked him to state the
qualifications. He stated that OSD could use the data elements proposed.
4.I Inoted that the IG/CM Chairman, Gen. Stilwell, had
asked him and r. Snider of OSD to collaborate on developing common data
elements for use by the Community in recording damage assessments. He further
noted that the IG/CM wanted these elements to be used for data on all
disclosures, including press, defectors, technical surveillance and espionage
cases. Mr. Anderson commented that program managers were the only ones who
could meaningfully state how they had been damage d by espionage or other means
causing loss of sensitive data. aid the UDIS didn't seem to
be the proper body to address this matter. He as ed members to comment on how
they thought SECOM could be responsive in this damage assessment project. Mr.
suggested that SECOM advise the IG/CM that we cannot participate in
Lnis ect as it involves matters beyond our jurisdiction and within the
jurisdiction of others. Mr. Anderson said he agreed. The other members
indicated their assent to this suggestion.
5. Mr. Rubino asked which, if any, members could provide him information
on the nature and extent of their agencies' practices on sharing narcotics
intelligence with the Drug Enforcement Agency. Several responses were
provided for later follow-up by Mr. Rubino.
6. Mr. Anderson advised that the Senate had attached a rider to the
Defense Appropriations Bill to limit use of the polygraph in Defense. The
rider would also require the President to report annually to the Congress on
the validity and reliability of the polygraph. Mr. Anderson said this would
make it impossible for Defense to comply fully with NSDD-84. He said Defense
would ask the White House for guidance. He noted that another rider to the
same bill, however, provides desired relief from FOIA requirements.
7, said part of the DCI's concern about "leaks" focused on
the security of the National Intelligence Daily (NID). He described a recent
DCI letter to NID recipients stating ground rules for use of the document -
the NID is intended for use by only the single addressee for each copy; each
copy is to be returned in 24 hours; and NIDs are not to be reproduced. The
letter, sent to 172 recipients, noted flagrant violations of all three rules,
and asked for responses on recipients' practices by 16 June. About a third of
the addressees made no response. Those responses received suggest that the
24-hour rule is not wholly reasonable (e.g., weekends, TDY by executives).
said an analysis of responses was being prepared for the DCI. He
asked mem e s tinnulledgeable of any nonrespondents to try to get them to answer
7
SECRE
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5
ITEM 6 - Next Meetings
advised that the next two regular meetings were
scheduled for 10:00 a.m. on 3 August and 14 September, both Wednesdays.
said that would put us in line for the annual, overnight SECOM seminar
scheduled for the 11th and 12t
h of October 1983.
xecutiVe ecretary
8
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/11/19: CIA-RDP87T00623R000200130007-5