Co M P L I a N C E W I T H T H E Jfk Ac T B Y Go V E R N M E N T of F I C

Home , Lee Harvey Oswald, Marina Oswald Porter, Ruth Paine

CHAPTER 8 CO M P L I A N C E W I T H T H E JFK A C T B Y G O V E R N M E N T O F F I C E S

A. INTRODUCTION Chapter 6 of this Report describes both the Review Board’s requests for additional infor- Are federal agencies cooperating fully, mation and records to federal agencies and or is there resistance that fosters public federal agencies’ responses to those requests. distrust of the government?1 The Review Board’s compliance pro g r a m The John F. Kennedy Assassination Records stressed agency obligations to search for and Collection Act of 1992 (JFK Act) directed fed- publicly release records relating to President eral agencies to search for re c o rds re l a t i n g Kennedy’s assassination. As part of its com- to the assassination of President Kennedy pliance program, the Review Board asked and to transfer those re c o rds to the John F. each agency to submit a declaration, under Kennedy Assassination Records Collection penalty of perjury, describing the re c o rd (JFK Collection) at the National A rc h i v e s searches that it completed, the assassination and Records Administration (NARA) for records that it located, and any other actions public disclosure. As explained earlier in it took to release assassination records. The this report, agencies began their compliance Review Board established the compliance activities even before the Senate confirmed program in furtherance of the JFK Act’s man- the nomination of the A s s a s s i n a t i o n date that there be “an enforceable, indepen- R e c o rds Review Board members in 1994. dent and accountable process for the public Once the Review Board convened, it disclosure” of records on the Kennedy assas- assessed the efforts of federal agencies to sination.2 comply with the terms of the JFK Act. The Review Board worked extensively with In late 1996, the Review Board initiated a for- agency personnel to resolve outstanding mal program to ensure that all re l e v a n t compliance issues prior to submission of agencies were complying with the JFK A c t . Final Declarations of Compliance. The Review Board used its compliance program to ensure that government offices ful- B. FEDERAL AGENCY COMPLIANCE WITH THE filled their JFK Act obligations. The pro g r a m JFK A CT re q u i red agencies to certify that: Each section of this chapter describes work (1) the agency conducted a thoro u g h that a particular agency completed, both s e a rch for assassination re c o rds as that before and during the Review Board’s exis- term is defined by the JFK Act and the tence.3 Review Board’s regulation further defining the term; 1. Central Intelligence Agency (2) the agency identified, organized, and reviewed its assassination records; The Review Board considered the CIA’s com- (3) the agency prepared its assassination pliance with the JFK Act, including complete records for public release at NARA; disclosure of all CIA records relating to Lee (4) the agency responded to each of the Harvey Oswald and the Kennedy assassina- Review Board’s requests for additional infor- tion, to be one of its highest priorities. mation and records; and (5) the agency transmitted its assassination The CIA complied with the JFK Act through records to NARA. the auspices of the Agency’s Historical

145 Review Program (previously the Historical the Directorate of Operations, the Direc t o r a t e Review Group or HRG). HRP reviewed doc- of Intelligence, the Directorate of Ad m i n i s t r a - uments, re f e r red documents within CIA, tion, and the Directorate of Science & Tec h - answered questions, negotiated issues with no l o g y .) As a result of this search direc t i v e , the Review Board staff, and, after Board vot- the CIA identified 31 boxes of potentially ing, processed documents for release to responsive re c o rds, and these were for- NARA. The HRP reviewers were all CIA wa r ded to the HRG for review under the JFK annuitants, with twenty years or more expe- Act. Included were 19 boxes of working files rience, working as independent contractors. on the Kennedy assassination by CIA off i c e r Beginning with a 14-member staff in 1992, Russ Holmes (for many years he was the the staff grew steadily to 29 reviewers and Agency’s focal point officer with res p o n s i b i l i t y nine administrative personnel by the sum- for responding to questions related to CIA’s mer of 1998. HRP also drew on the resources Kennedy assassination-related rec o r ds); two of numerous other offices at CIA for record boxes on KGB defector Yuri Nosenko; seven searches, answers to Review Board ques- boxes of Latin American Division rec o rd s ; tions, and the provision of records for inspec- and three boxes related to the Bay of Pigs. The tion by the Board. From Review Board identified 22 boxes as res p o n - [T]he only thing more horrify- 1992 until December 1997, sive under the JFK Act, although many of the ing to me than the assassination HRG functioned as part of rec o r ds were duplicates of rec o r ds contained itself is the insidious, perverse the Center for Studies in in the Oswald 201 file or the CIA–HSCA notion that elements of the Intelligence and its Chief se q u e s t e r ed collection files. American Government, that my was the Director of Cen- own Agency, had some part in tral Intelligence’s per- The Review Board requested numerous cate- it. I am determined personally sonal rep r esentative to the gories of additional CIA records in an effort to make public or to expose to Review Board. In January to ensure the most complete disclosure of disinterested eyes every relevant 1998, the CIA’s reo rg a n i - information relating to the Kennedy assassi- scrap of paper in CIA’s posses- zation renamed HRG the nation. The Review Board made 16 formal sion, in the hope of helping to Historical Review Pro- requests in writing, and 37 informal requests, dispel this corrosive suspicion. gram and moved it to join for additional information and records from —CIA Director Robert Gates, other CIA de c l a s s i f i c a t i o n the CIA. May 12, 1992 e fforts in the Office of Information Manageme n t . In anticipation of the Review Board ’ s requests for additional information and In 1992 and 1993, the CIA’s Historical Review records, the CIA, in April 1995, requested Group proceeded to assemble CIA records each directorate and the DCI administrative relating to the assassination. In early 1992, officer “to appoint a focal point officer” for prior to enactment of the JFK Act, the Chief the JFK Act. Review Board inquiries were of the History Staff located and inventoried referred by the HRG to the appropriate CIA the CIA records on the assassination that CIA office. A number of CIA officers facilitated held pursuant to an agreement between the the difficult processes of securing access to C I A and the HSCA (the CIA–HSCA CIA files, as well as negotiating issues relat- sequestered collection). This material com- ing to the release of records. The Board found prised 64 boxes. In addition, the History Staff that, whenever it and its staff were able to secured the 16 boxes of the original Lee Har- deal directly with knowledgeable experts vey Oswald 201 file. Following passage of throughout the Agency on substantive issues the JFK Act, the CIA reviewed and declassi- or records, more often than not the result was fied with numerous redaction the Oswald a mutually acceptable release or postpone- 201 file and files within the CIA–HSCA ment. These compromises reasonably bal- sequestered collection, and in 1993 the CIA anced the public interest in disclosure with transmitted those records to the JFK Collec- legitimate needs for continued secrecy on tion at NARA. limited issues. The Review Board encoun- tered early CIA resistance to making records In October 1993, the CIA’s HRG requested the available to the Review Board, as well as various CIA di r ectorates to search for addi- resistance to the ultimate disclosure of tional rec o r ds on Lee Harvey Oswald and on records. A small number of CIA staff officers, the JFK assassination. (The directorates were almost exclusively from the Directorate of

146 Operations, unnecessarily impeded the Board inquiries regarding specific records. process and damaged the Agency’s interests The Review Board was disturbed by the by resisting compromise with all-or-nothing belated discovery of these records, particu- positions. larly given its mandate to assure the public that all relevant materials on the Kennedy In response to the Review Board requests, the assassination were being released by the U.S. Board staff was granted access to review government. original, unsanitized CIA f i l e s — i n c l u d i n g original files of the highest officials at CIA In an effort to ensure that the CIA had con- during the time of the assassination—to conducted thorough and adequate searc h e s firm the existence (or non-existence) of mate- under the JFK Act, the Review Board specifi- rials relating to the assassination. Since the cally requested that CIA D i rector Georg e CIAfiles covered other matters in addition to Tenet issue a directive to all components of the assassination, the CIA was initially reluc- CIA requesting that they identify any records tant to provide whole files for Review Board relating to the assassination. Director Tenet inspection. In order to obtain access to certain issued the directive. Other measures were sets of files, and thus examine them in their suggested by the Review Board, and these original form, the Review Board agreed to w e re undertaken by CIA. In particular, limit access to one or two Board staff mem- offices most likely to contain assassination bers. The Board believed that agreeing to this records (e.g., Counter- Intelligence and Latin limitation was of practical benefit because it American Division) were asked to conduct secured access to entire original sets of files. targeted searches following Review Board guidelines. As a result of the Review Board’s requests and inspection of various CIA files, the The Executive Dire c t o r, the third highest Review Board staff identified additional level official of the CIA, certified under oath materials relating to the assassination in that the CIAhad fully complied with the JFK addition to those initially identified in 1992 Act. In its Final Declaration of Compliance, and 1993. the CIA stated that each of its directorates, as well as the official responsible for the DCI In 1997, the CIA provided the Review Board a rea, had certified that “their re s p e c t i v e staff with several briefings by representatives offices or directorates [had] properly and of each directorate with respect to their files fully responded to requests from the Board.” and re c o rd keeping systems and their CIA further represented, under oath, that it searches for assassination-related records. In had “made diligent searches to locate and its searches for records on the assassination, disclose. . . all records in its possession relat- the CIA conducted both manual and elec- ing to Lee Harvey Oswald and the assassina- tronic database searches. In 1998, the Review tion of President Kennedy” and that it was Board expressed to the CIA concern regard- “ a w a re of no other assassination-re l a t e d ing the thoroughness of CIA’s initial 1992–93 records in its possession being withheld.. . .” record searches. The Review Board’s concern The Central Intelligence Agency submitted arose out of the CIA’s belated discovery of its Final Declaration of Compliance dated several files relating directly to Lee Harvey September 24, 1998. Oswald, including (a) a multi-volume Office of Security file on Oswald; (b) a previously 2. Federal Bureau of Investigation undisclosed continuation of the Oswald 201 file containing a small number of documents The Federal Bureau of Investigation identi- post-dating the 1977–78 HSCA investigation; fied its primary files on the Kennedy assassi- (c) another, small file on Oswald designated nation in the 1970s in response to public by the CIA as an “A” file; and (d) additional requests for disclosure under the Freedom of records relating to a KGB source with infor- Information Act. These rec o r ds, ref e r r ed to by mation relating to Lee and Marina Oswald. the FBI as the “core and related” files, consist None of these files had been identified by the of headquarters and field office files on the CIA in 1992–93, when the CIA first assem- following subjects: Lee Harvey Oswald, Jack bled its files on the Kennedy assassination. Ru b y , the JFK assassination investigation, the These files were located through Review FBI administrative file on the War r en Com-

147 mission, Marina Oswald, Ruth Paine, George the Review Board that it would attempt to de Mohrenshildt, Clay Shaw, David Ferrie, finish its processing of assassination records the FBI administrative file on the Church as a result of the streamlined processes. In Committee, and the FBI administrative file on March 1998, the FBI wrote a letter to the the House Select Committee on As s a s s i n a - Review Board stating that it did not expect to tions. The FBI established its JFK Task Force finish its assassination re c o rds pro c e s s i n g (which consisted of five document rev i e w - until February 2000. After a series of meet- er s ) 4 in 1992 as Congres s ings between the Review Board and the FBI, The FBI is absolutely committed debated legislation to the FBI again committed to finishing its JFK to achieving the maximum dis- accelerate disclosure of Act processing before the end of September closure of JFK material. all rec o r ds related to the 1998. —FBI Director Louis J. Freeh, assassination of Pres i d e n t November 24, 1993 K e n n e d y. The FBI con- The Review Board formally submitted to the ducted rec o r ds search e s FBI more than 50 requests for additional of the core and rel a t e d rec o r ds. In response to the Board’s req u e s t s , subjects in its Central Records System and its the FBI made its original files available. In a automated electronic surveillance index limited number of instances, the Bureau pro- (ELSUR Index) to determine that they had vided documentation on those files that were ga t h e r ed all core and related files in FBI head- de s t r oyed according to the FBI’s rec o r ds ret e n - quarters and field offices. tion schedule. The Review Board designated thousands of documents for assassination The FBI identified a second major category of rec o r ds processing as a result of these req u e s t s . records to be processed under the JFK Act which the FBI refers to as the “HSCA Sub- In January 1997 and again in April 1998, the jects.” In its investigation of the Kennedy staff of the Review Board met with the FBI to assassination, the House Select Committee a d d ress any outstanding matters with on Assassinations (HSCA) requested access respect to the Bureau’s compliance with the to records responsive to FBI searches on more JFK Act. The compliance program with the than 600 different subjects. The HSCA cast a FBI focused primarily on the scope of the wide net in its investigation, and the HSCA FBI’s searches under the JFK Act. The Review subjects range from individuals who had Board staff raised additional records issues, direct contact with Lee Harvey Oswald to including the identification of any working major figures in organized crime and anti- files of top FBI officials with responsibility Castro Cuban political activity. The HSCA for overseeing the investigation of the secured an agreement from the FBI in 1978 Kennedy assassination and accounting for all that the Bureau would retain the HSCA sub- relevant electronic surveillance that related jects as a “sequestered collection” which to the assassination. Acting on the Review would be filed as a set of records apart from Board’s concerns, the FBI requested all FBI the FBI’s central records system. Headquarters Divisions to conduct searches for any materials not retrievable through the All of these records (the core and related files FBI central records system and for records and the HSCA subjects) were identified, and that may have been maintained by top FBI the FBI had begun its JFK Act processing officials. While the FBI has discovered some prior to the appointment of the Review new assassination records as a result of this Board. The FBI delivered its first shipment of search, they have not found any working assassination records to the JFK Collection in files maintained by top FBI officials from the December 1993. As of September 30, 1998, the early 1960s. FBI has made 22 shipments of assassination records to the JFK Collection. On the issue of electronic surveillance, the FBI requested all 56 of its field offices to identify As described in Chapters 4 and 5 of this any electronic surveillance in which assassina- report, the Review Board streamlined its ti o n - r elated figures were either speaking, or review processes in 1997 to ensure that all ref e r r ed to, in conversations monitored by the assassination records would be reviewed by FBI. The FBI searched its ELSUR indices under the close of the Review Board’s term. In the the core file subjects. The FBI certified that it spring and summer of 1997, the FBI assured identified only one instance where a core sub-

148 ject was a target of FBI electronic surveillance, rec o r ds, the Secret Service identified, as assas- and that was the electronic surveillance of sination rec o r ds under the JFK Act, additional Marina Oswald in Dallas following the assas- materials beyond those contained in the offi - sination. All other responsive electronic sur- cial case file for the Kennedy assassination. veillance identified by the FBI consisted of so- called “overhears,” where a person is Co n g r ess passed the JFK Act of 1992. One mentioned in a conversation. Nonetheless, the month later, the Secret Service began its com- FBI certified that these would be rev i e w e d pliance efforts. However, in January 1995, the and processed under the JFK Act. Se c r et Service destroyed presidential prot e c - tion survey reports for some of Pres i d e n t The FBI has a well-indexed, centralized filing Kennedy’s trips in the fall of 1963. The Review system, and the FBI’s official main files on Bo a r d learned of the destruction approx i - the Kennedy assassination were readily iden- mately one week after the Secret Service tified and processed under the JFK Act. The de s t r oyed them, when the Board was drafting bulk of FBI records relating to the assassina- its request for additional information. The tion have been placed in the JFK Collection. Bo a r d believed that the Secret Service files on However, at the time of this Report, the FBI the President’s travel in the weeks prec e d i n g was still processing some additional materi- his murder would be rel e v a n t . als for inclusion in the JFK Collection. The Review Board requested the Secret Service The FBI submitted its Final Declaration of to explain the circumstances surrounding the Compliance on August 20, 1998. de s t r uction, after passage of the JFK Act. The Se c r et Service formally explained the circu m - 3. Secret Service stances of this destruction in corres p o n d e n c e and an oral briefing to the Review Board. The Secret Service transferred its official case file on the Kennedy assassination to NARA The Review Board also sought to account for in 1979. certain additional re c o rd categories that might relate to the Kennedy assassination. In December 1992, after the JFK Act was For example, the Review Board sought infor- passed, the Assistant Director for the Secret mation regarding a protective intelligence Service Office of Administration directed the file on the Fair Play for Cuba Committee Secret Service to inventory its records in an (FPCC) and regarding protective intelligence attempt to locate records relating to the assas- files relating to threats to President Kennedy sination. In response, the Chief of the Policy in the Dallas area (the Dallas-related files Analysis & Records Systems Branch within were disclosed to the Warren Commission). the Office of Administration reviewed the The FPCC and Dallas-related files apparently inventories of Secret Service records in stor- w e re destroyed, and the Review Board age. Secret Service made these inventories, as sought any information re g a rding the well as archive re c o rds, available to the destruction. As of this writing, the Service Review Board staff for inspection. In 1995, was unable to provide any specific informa- the Assistant Director for the Office of tion regarding the disposition of these files. Administration instructed each A s s i s t a n t Director and the Chief Counsel to search for The Secret Service submitted its Final Decla- assassination-related records. In December ration of Compliance dated September 18, 1996, the same Assistant Director issued 1998, but did not execute it under oath. The another search directive to each employee. Review Board asked the Service to re-submit its Final Declaration. In addition to the Secret Service’s search of its ar chival rec o r ds, the Review Board submitted 4. National Security Agency to the Secret Service more than twenty sepa- rate requests for rec o r ds. The Secret Service Despite the highly classified nature of its oper- was generally cooperative in making the ations, the National Security Agency (NSA) requested rec o r ds available to the Review conducted searches for assassination rec o rd s . B o a rd. As a result of the Service’s own In March 1993, NSA’s Deputy Director of se a r ches, as well as Review Board requests for Plans, Policy, and Programs (DDP) direc t e d

149 that an NSA-wide search be conducted for had “report[ed] on reactions to the assassina- rec o r ds responsive to the JFK Act. Wit h i n tion” and that they did not contain “unique NSA, the Office of Policy coordinated rev i e w information” on the “planning , execution, or of NSA’s assassination-related re c o rd s . investigation” of the assassination. Ac c o r ding to NSA, “[a] search of all files and The National Security Agency submitted its databases believed to hold such [assassina- Final Declaration of Compliance dated ti o n - r elated] rec o r ds was conducted by each August 18, 1998. of the Directorates within NSA....” In addition to database searches, NSA assigned ten indi- 5. Department of State viduals to hand-search approximately 200 boxes of archived material from the 1963–64 The Department of State transferred its main time frame. The Directorate of Operations and record holdings regarding the assassination the NSA Ar chives also conducted searches in to NARA in 1989. These were “lot files” con- response to specific requests of the Review sisting mostly of re c o rds re g a rding the Bo a r d in 1995. As a result of NSA’s 1993 and Department of State’s work relating to the 1995 searches, NSA identified a total of 269 Warren Commission investigation. The files rec o r ds to be processed under the JFK Act. In originated in the Department of State Legal 1998, an additional 109 assassination rec o rd s Advisor’s Office and the Office of Security we r e identified by NSA to be processed under and Consular Affairs. After Congress passed the JFK Ac t . the JFK Act, the Department of State opened these files to the public in August 1993. NSA located the bulk of its assassination records in the NSA Legislative Affairs Office The Department of State designated its Office and General Counsel’s Office. These records of Freedom of Information, Privacy & Classi- related to NSA responses to prior investiga- fication Review (within the Bureau of tional inquiries regarding the assassination. Administration) as the entity responsible for In March 1995, the NSA briefed the Review identifying and processing assassination Board members as to how it conducted its records under the JFK Act. The office in turn searches for assassination records and, in appointed a retired Department of State his- addition, submitted answers to specific ques- torian to coordinate the Department’s JFK tions of the Review Board concerning assas- Act compliance. sination records in the possession of NSA. The Review Board subsequently submitted The Department of State staff conducted additional questions to NSA, particularly numerous searches of its records to ensure regarding NSA intelligence records relating compliance with the JFK Act. For example, in to Cuba or the Soviet Union. NSA answered 1993, the Department searched its Central the Board’s questions, submitting a detailed Foreign Policy records. The search included a set of responses to Review Board inquiries review of manifests of retired files of Depart- regarding intelligence holdings on Cuba and mental offices and foreign posts, as well as the Soviet Union that might lead to relevant computerized searches of its automated doc- information relating to the assassination. ument systems. Also in 1993, the Assistant NSA stated that “both Cuba and the USSR S e c retary of State for Administration for- were targets of high interest [to NSA] during mally requested various offices within the the time of the assassination,” and that NSA Department to search for records relating to searched its files relating to those countries. the assassination. NSA concluded that “[t]hese searches produced records that primarily reflected reac- Among the records located by the Depart- tions to the assassination.” ment were 25,000 pages of material relating to condolences, funeral attendance arrange- With respect to NSA’s review of its intelli- ments, and memorial activities. Also, “virtu- gence holdings, NSA “certifie[d] that it has ally every diplomatic conversation held dur- neither located, nor is it withholding, any ing the month or so after the assassination intelligence records containing information contained oral condolences or references to of investigatory significance to the Kennedy the recent American tragedy.” After process- assassination.” NSA advised the Review ing approximately 3,000 such records for the Board that its relevant intelligence records JFK Collection, the Department discontinued

150 p rocessing these kinds of re c o rds and 6. Department of Justice “restricted its search to documents relevant to the murder investigation.” The Review The Review Board worked separately with Board did not object to this approach. each of the relevant divisions of the Depart- ment of Justice to identify and release records Former Foreign Service Officers, working as under the JFK Act. Accordingly, the Review re-employed annuitants, reviewed Depart- Board worked with the Office of Information ment of State-originated documents and & Privacy (OIP), responsible for “leadership documents re f e r red by other agencies to o ffices,” the Criminal Division, the Civil State. Other entities within the Department Division, the Civil Rights Division, and the of State also participated in review and Office of Legal Counsel. The work of each declassification, including the Bureau of Division is summarized below. Diplomatic Security, the Office of Passport P o l i c y, and the Bureau of Intelligence & a. Office of Information and Privacy. R e s e a rch. Department of State re v i e w e r s w e re sent to NARA, the CIA, the House and This office is responsible for rec o r ds of the Senate Intelligence Committees, and the JFK “leadership offices” of the Department of Jus- Library to review and declassify Department tice, including rec o r ds of the Attorney Gen- of State re c o rds. More than 10,000 such eral, Deputy Attorney General, and As s o c i a t e re c o rds were processed under the JFK Act. In Attorney General. In addition, OIP is res p o n - addition, Department of State re v i e w e r s sible for handling FOIA requests and appeals p rocessed approximately 4,500 documents di r ected against all entities within the Depart- re f e r red to State from other agencies. ment of Justice. OIP assigned staff to carry out its obligations under the JFK Act, including a Since 1997, a team of Department of State senior counsel, a Department of Justice reviewers also has been declassifying ar chivist, and two FOIA/declassification spe- Department records pursuant to Executive cialists. The senior counsel was appointed as the OIP rep r esentative to coordinate OIP’s O rder 12958. These reviewers were ef forts under the JFK Ac t . i n s t ructed to identify any assassination- related materials in the course of their After passage of the JFK Act, OIP had identi- re v i e w. Many of the re c o rds that were fied materials relating to FOIAlitigation over s e a rched under the JFK Act have been records relating to the JFK assassination, and processed under Executive Order 12958 and these materials were placed in the JFK Col- sent to NARA. In view of the Department of lection. OIP also located and designated as State’s representations regarding its declassi- assassination records the following: (1) cer- fication efforts under the Executive Order, tain files of Robert Keuch, who was DOJ’s the Review Board determined that a further liaison to the HSCA; (2) a file of Attorney detailed review of these records for assassi- General Edward Levi (entitled, “FBI/JFK nation-related materials was not necessary. Assassination Investigation”); (3) a file of Attorney General William Barr; (4) files from Among the rec o r ds identified under the JFK DOJ’s Office of Public Affairs; (5) documents Act and transferred to NARA we r e: diplo- from DOJ’s Departmental Review Commit- matic cables reg a r ding foreign reaction to the tee involving administrative appeals of FOIA assassination; rec o r ds from the Mexico City requests; and (6) a historical file containing Post File; documents from the rec o r ds of assassination-related documents from “lead- Llewellyn E. Thompson, former Am b a s s a d o r ership offices” and those that have been the to the Soviet Union; rec o r ds of Secretary Dean subject of past FOIA litigation. Rusk, including memoranda summarizing telephone conversations he had reg a r ding the The Office of Information and Privacy sub- assassination; and working files on the assas- mitted its Final Declaration of Compliance sination maintained by U. Alexis Johnson, dated August 6, 1998. then Deputy Undersecretary of State. b. Criminal Division. The Department of State submitted its Final Declaration of Compliance dated March 18, After passage of the JFK Act, the Acting As s i s - 1998. tant Attorney General for the Criminal Divi-

151 sion instructed high-level officials within the as potentially responsive to the JFK Act: (1) Division to forward any assassination rec o rd s case files relating to FOIA litigation in which to the Freedom of Information/Privacy Ac t plaintiffs sought access to U.S. government (F O I / P A)Unit within the Division. In addi- records on the Kennedy assassination; (2) a tion, rec o r d searches were conducted by the case file relating to compensation for the U.S. FO I A / P A Unit and the Criminal Division government’s taking of the Oswald rifle Re c o r ds Unit. Files relating to the assassina- (Marina Oswald Porter v. United States) (this tion were identified and placed into the JFK file, however, had been destroyed in 1991 Collection in 1993. Among the Criminal Divi- according to the Department’s records reten- sion files in the JFK Collection are the Divi- tion/destruction schedule); (3) a Criminal sion’s main file on the assassination and a file Division file relating to the Kennedy family’s on FBI handling of the assassination investi- agreement to donate certain personal items gation. In the course of complying with the of President Kennedy to NARA; and (4) mis- JFK Act, the Criminal Division utilized four cellaneous materials relating to the assassina- attorneys and support personnel. tion located with the Director of the Federal Programs Branch. In complying with Review Board requests, the Criminal Divison made available for Review In 1993, the Civil Division transferred to Bo a r d inspection numerous original files rel a t - NARAthe small collection of documents that ing to organized crime and internal security had been discovered among the secured files matters. As of September 1998, major cate- of the Director for the Federal Pro g r a m s gories of assassination rec o r ds in the custody Branch. This collection of materials included of the Criminal Division had not yet been pictures of the President’s clothing after the tr a n s f e r r ed to the JFK Collection at NARA. assassination, documents relating to the These consisted of the rec o r ds identified by a u t o p s y, and memoranda relating to the the Board from its review of the orga n i z e d availability of Warren Commission materials. crime and internal security files. The Review Aside from these materials, no other assassi- Bo a r d is disappointed that these rec o r ds have nation-related records had been placed in the not been processed and transferred to the JFK JFK Collection at that time. Collection, but the Criminal Division has committed to completing the process of rel e a s i n g The Civil Division defends federal agencies in these rec o r ds to the JFK Collection. suits arising under the FOIA, and the Division had numerous FOIA litigation cases brou g h t The Criminal Division has also generated against the government for denying access to additional records regarding recent ballistics Kennedy assassination rec o r ds. The Review testing of one of the bullet fragments and has B o a rd requested that the Civil Division committed to placing those records in the JFK pr ocess its FOIA litigation case files relating to Collection. assassination rec o r ds under the JFK Act. The Civil Division took the position that FOIA li t i - The Criminal Division submitted its Final gation files on JFK assassination rec o r ds need Declaration of Compliance dated September not be reviewed or released under the JFK Ac t . 2, 1998. Ho w e v e r , the Review Board prevailed upon the Civil Division to release these FOIA fi l e s c. Civil Division. under the JFK Act. The various JFK-rel a t e d FO I A cases were identified to the Civil Divi- In March 1993, the Acting Assistant At t o r n e y sion by the Review Board, and they were General for the Civil Division directed all Divi- transmitted to the JFK Collection. sion offices to identify any assassination- related rec o r ds that might be in their custody. The Civil Division submitted its Final Decla- In addition, the Civil Division appointed the ration of Compliance dated July 29, 1998. Division’s attorney in charge of its FOI/PA Unit to coordinate release of assassination d. Civil Rights Division. rec o r ds under the JFK Ac t . The Civil Rights Division located one file As a result of the search directive, the Civil responsive to the JFK Act. This file consisted Division identified four categories of records of a civil rights complaint made against New

152 Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison, and making available to the Review Board addi- it is in the JFK Collection. tional rec o r ds for inspection.Treasury has confirmed that all of its identified assassination The Civil Rights Division submitted its Final records have been transferred to the JFK Col- Declaration of Compliance dated July 2, 1997. lection at NARA.

e. Office of Legal Counsel. The Department of the Treasury submitted its Final Declaration of Compliance dated The Office of Legal Counsel collected docu- August 12, 1998. ments spanning from the date of the assassination through the Congressional inquiries b. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms of the 1970s pertaining to legal aspects of the (ATF). assassination, the start-up of the Wa r re n Commission, access to Warren Commission In 1992, ATF’s Assistant [T]he Department of the Trea- evidence, legislation making Pre s i d e n t i a l D i rector (Administra- sury supports the purpose assassination a federal crime, and public tion) directed each of the underlying this Joint Resolution inquiries about the assassination. These heads of offices within and agrees with its intention of records have been transmitted to the JFK Col- ATF to locate any records making the greatest number of lection. relating to the assassina- government documents avail- tion. No assassination able to the public.Perhaps these The Review Board did not request a declara- records were identified at additional disclosures, and the tion of compliance from the Office of Legal that time. In addition, in unfettered review by the public Counsel. 1995, ATF re v i e w e d of the documents, will help inventories of re c o rd s relieve the lingering concerns 7. Department of the Treasury held in storage, and no and anxieties surrounding this assassination re c o rd s tragedy, and restore the confi- The Review Board worked with various com- were identified through dence of the American people ponents of the Department of Tre a s u r y, that review. In particular, that there are no more mysteries including Main Treasury (i.e., the Office of ATF reported that the associated with the tragedy. the Secretary), Secret Service (discussed Fort Worth Records Cen- —Department of Treasury, above), the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), ter held no ATF records Senate Hearings on JFK Act the Customs Service, and the Bureau of Alco- from the 1960s. ATF also hol, Tobacco & Firearms (ATF). made search

a. Main Treasury. The Review Board sought to have ATF locate any 1963–64 rec o r ds relating to ATF’s assis- In December 1992, the Assistant Director for tance in the investigation of the JFK assassina- Policy, Plans and Paperwork Management tion, as well as rec o r ds from the late 1970s requested the Departmental Offices Records relating to ATF’s work for the HSCA. The Officer to identify any assassination-related Review Board specifically requested that ATF records under the JFK Act. No assassination check for rec o r ds from the ATF Field Office in records were identified at that time. In 1995, Dallas, as well as rec o r ds for the ATF Direc t o r the Review Board began to make specific and ATF Chief Counsel, and this was done. additional requests for information and re c o rds, and Treasury searched for the ATF was fully cooperative and documented records that the Board requested. In addition, its search efforts in detail and under oath. Treasury made available original records for ATF located only a handful of records, all of Review Board inspection. which related to its work with the HSCA.

In late 1996, Main Treasury designated the One factor that may explain the inability of Departmental Offices Records Officer to coor- ATF to locate any relevant records from the dinate Treasury’s work under the JFK Act. In 1960s was the fact that ATF was not created addition, a senior attorney from the Office of as an independent entity until 1972. ATF’s General Counsel was tasked to handle JFK Ac t predecessor agency was the Alcohol Tobacco matters. These officials assisted in the proc e s s - Tax Unit of the Internal Revenue Service. The ing of identified assassination rec o r ds and in Review Board therefore requested that IRS

153 determine whether it had any pre-1972 ATF identify all records it had relating to the records relating to the assassination. IRS was assassination. In 1994, IRS reported that it unable to locate any ATF assassination had identified, pursuant to the JFK A c t , records within its files. approximately fifty documents. These documents apparently related to a tax proceeding The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms involving Jack Ruby’s estate. At the time, no submitted its Final Declaration of Compli- further work was undertaken by IRS to ance dated November 11, 1997. release these documents or to identify any other records under the JFK Act. c. Customs Service. In late 1996, the Review Board sought to After passage of the JFK Act, Customs con- clarify what IRS did to locate additional ducted a search of its Washington, D.C. head- re c o rds relating to the assassination and quarters files through computerized what it intended to release in light of Sec- searches, as well as extensive review of its tion 6103. In addition, the Review Board archival files with the assistance of Review sought to inspect assassination re c o rds that Board staff. In addition, Customs instructed w e re, or would be, collected by IRS, includ- its field offices to search for assassination ing original tax returns of Lee Harvey records. Customs identified a modest num- Oswald, and re c o rds relating to IRS work ber of assassination records. with the Wa r ren Commission. The Review B o a rd also sought to ascertain the status The Review Board staff requested additional and anticipated treatment of such re c o rd s searches of Customs headquarters records, by IRS under the JFK Act. While IRS con- but no additional records were identified. In s i d e red such re c o rds under Section 6103 an effort to determine whether field offices exempt from release, the Review Board kept records that headquarters might have asserted its legal authority, under the JFK destroyed, the Review Board asked that Cus- Act, to confidentially inspect IRS assassina- toms have its Dallas field office re-check for tion re c o rds. However, the assassination any relevant files. re c o rds collected by the IRS were not made available for the Review Board’s inspection. Customs Service submitted its Final Declara- Only a year later did IRS affirm the Review tion of Compliance dated June 30, 1997. B o a rd’s legal authority to inspect IRS assassination re c o rd s . d. Internal Revenue Service. In 1998, the Review Board requested that IRS The identification and formally document its actions and compli- [T]he department and the IRS release of assassination- ance under the JFK Act. The Review Board have no objection to lifting the related rec o r ds in IRS’s requested that the IRS search for records that bar to public disclosure of the custody has been diffi c u l t might relate to the assassination and that the tax information previously pro- because Section 11(a) of IRS specifically identify any such records that vided to the Warren Commis- the JFK Act explicitly pro- it believed could not be released under Sec- sion and the House and Senate vides that tax-related tion 6103. The Review Board also requested Committees. records continue to be that IRS review the tax-related records in the —Department of Treasury, exempt from public dis- Warren Commission and HSCA holdings to Senate Hearings on JFK Act cl o s u r e under Section 6103 determine which records could be released of the IRS Code. The consistent with Section 6103. Review Board believes that significant assassina t i o n - r elated rec o r ds of the IRS were pre- At the request of the Review Board, the IRS cluded from release under the JFK Act. Most intends to forward to the JFK Collection all si g n i f i c a n t l y , the JFK Act failed to secure IRS’s tax-related assassination records identified public release of the original Lee Harvey by IRS, including those records to remain Oswald tax returns and significant tax-rel a t e d confidential pursuant to Section 6103. The material in the files of the War r en Commission.5 records covered by Section 6103, although transmitted to the JFK Collection, will not be Notwithstanding Section 6103, the Review released pending any later determination as B o a rd requested that the IRS collect and to their status under the IRS code.

154 The Review Board has received draft compli- The Review Board proceeded to formally des- ance statements from the Internal Revenue ignate the identified The PFIAB re c o rd s Service but has not received the IRS’s Final (many of which dealt with U.S. policy towards Declaration of Compliance. Cuba) as assassination rec o r ds under the JFK Act. Challenging the Review Board’s author- 8. National Security Council ity to designate pertinent rec o r ds as assassination re c o rds under the Act, The PFIAB The National Security Council did not ini- requested a document-by-document justifica- tially do any work in response to the JFK Act tion reg a r ding the relevance of the rec o r ds, the following its passage. In 1997, the Review public interest in their release, and whether B o a rd contacted the NSC to ascertain The PFIAB documents contained unique whether it might have any re c o rds that information. The Board had previously articu- would be relevant under the JFK Act. The lated the relevance of the materials to The NSC was fully cooperative in identifying and PFIAB and considered the requested analysis making available the records within its cus- to be unnecessary, burdensome, and ulti- tody and control. NSC provided the Review mately an obstacle to release. At the time of Board with various inventories to records this Report, The PFIAB reserved its right to held off-site and certain re c o rds from its appeal to the President any Board decision to vault in the Old Executive Office Building. release The PFIAB rec o rd s . Review Board staff worked with senior NSC records officials to designate assassination- 10. Immigration & Naturalization related records under the JFK Act. Among Service the early 1960s records designated were minutes of NSC and Special Group meetings. In 1993, the Immigration & Naturalization The materials covered issues regarding Cuba Service (INS) conducted a rec o r ds search in and Vietnam. response to passage of the JFK Act. Specifi- ca l l y , INS’s Assistant Commissioner for the The National Security Council submitted its Re c o r ds System Division directed all INS Final Declaration of Compliance dated April components to search for rec o r ds that met the 30, 1998. statutory definition of an assassination rec o r d. INS designated a Management An a - 9. The President’s Foreign Intelligence lyst for the Headquarters Records Manage- Advisory Board ment Branch to receive and process INS assassination rec o r ds under the JFK Act. Most In early 1997, the Review Board re q u e s t e d of the files identified by INS were files on var- that the President’s Foreign Intelligence ious individuals who had some connection to Advisory Board (PFIAB) make available any the assassination story, and theref o r e had pre- 1962–64 re c o rds that might relate to the viously been made available to Congres s i o n a l Kennedy assassination. The PFIAB agreed to committees, including the HSCA. After con- make available certain re c o rds for the sultation with other agencies, INS identified Review Board’s inspection. Over several additional files as being pertinent under the months, the Review Board staff inspected JFK Act. (A list of the INS files proc e s s e d these re c o rds and identified certain excerpts under the JFK Act is set forth in the INS Final as assassination re c o rds. When the Review Declaration of Compliance.) While INS had B o a rd sought to have the re c o rds pro c e s s e d identified over 65 files to be processed under for public release, The PFIAB took the posi- the JFK Act, none had been transferred to tion that these re c o rds were, in fact, not NA R A until late 1996. INS ultimately devoted releasable under the JFK Act. Senator War re n substantial res o u r ces to processing these files Rudman, Chairman of The PFIAB, appeare d for release under the JFK Ac t . b e f o re members of the Review Board in August 1998 to present The PFIAB’s view INS had not, at the time of this Report, com- that its re c o rds were not covered by the JFK pleted the transmission of its identified Act and, furthermore, that particular rec o rd s assassination records to the JFK Collection. identified by the Review Board were not Although INS had forwarded numerous files a s s a s s i n a t i o n - related within the meaning of to the JFK Collection, including files on Lee the statute. and Marina Oswald, INS had yet to forward

155 files on certain lesser-known figures, some began to make specific requests for addi- miscellaneous documents from its subject tional information from DIA. All requests files, and a work file on Carlos Marcello. INS were ultimately answered. attributes the delay, in part, to the time-con- suming processing of referring documents to In an effort to locate records responsive to the other agencies for review and awaiting agen- Review Board’s additional requests, a special cies’ release of their equities. INS has com- DIA task force worked at the Washington mitted to completing the transmission of all National Records Center in Suitland, Mary- remaining assassination-related files to the land, conducting a page-by-page review of JFK Collection. all pertinent pre-1965 Agency file series. After this review of its archive records, DIA The Immigration and Naturalization Service identified additional assassination-re l a t e d submitted its Final Declaration of Compli- documents. These records have been placed ance dated September 11, 1998. in the JFK Collection.

11. Office of the Secretary of Defense The Defense Intelligence Agency submitted its Final Declaration of Compliance dated The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) April 10, 1998. had not identified any assassination records by August 1993, the first deadline imposed 13. Department of the Army by the JFK Act. In October 1995, Review Board staff met with various Department of In response to the JFK Act, the Army con- Defense officials and identified topics and ducted in 1993 an “Army-wide canvassing record categories to be searched for under the for relevant records.” Another canvassing of JFK Act. As a result, components of the records was done in 1997. The Army reported armed forces under the Secretary of Defense that it conducted “a complete review of the were instructed to search for assassination 70,000 line item listing of the Army’s hold- records and, in addition, OSD’s own archival ings in the Federal Records Centers... . ” The re c o rds were searched. Miscellaneous Army identified various assassination records were thereafter identified from the Secretary of Defense official correspondence records, including: (a) material relating to files, including records on Cuba and corre- ballistics research performed by the Army in spondence with the HSCA. connection with the assassination; (b) the 1965 typewritten notes of Pierre Finck, the The OSD’s Directorate for Correspondence & Army pathologist who participated in the D i rectives was diligent in attempting to Kennedy autopsy; (c) records of the Army address the record-related issues raised by Corps of Engineers relating to the design and the Review Board. The OSD’s Records Sec- construction of the Kennedy gravesite; (d) tion ran computerized record searches and materials relating to the polygraph examina- inventoried its archive re c o rds and ulti- tion of Jack Ruby from the Defense Poly- mately responded to all Review Board graph Institute at Fort McClellan, Alabama; searches. (e) records on Cuba from the files of Joseph Califano, created while he was a Special The Office of the Secretary of Defense sub- Assistant to the Secretary of the Army in the mitted its Final Declaration of Compliance Kennedy administration; and (f) Army intel- dated May 21, 1998. ligence files on various individuals con- nected with the Kennedy assassination story. 12. Defense Intelligence Agency In addition, the Army made available microfilm records of the Pentagon Telecommunica- In 1993, DIA forwarded to NARA approxi- tions Agency, and the Review Board desig- mately one box of materials for the JFK Col- nated certain documents from the 1963–64 lection consisting mostly of correspondence period as assassination records. with the HSCA. The Review Board staff met with DIA in early 1997 and determined that The Department of the Army submitted its DIA had not reviewed all of its relevant Final Declaration of Compliance dated Sep- archive holdings. The Review Board then tember 11, 1998.

156 a. Investigative Records Repository. tion records. In 1996, the Marine Corps transmitted to the Review Board the original per- The Review Board staff also worked sepa- sonnel and medical Marine Corps files on rately with the IRR at Fort Meade, the Oswald. The Review Board transmitted these Army’s storage facility for counter-intelli- records to the JFK Collection. gence files. The IRR has released several intelligence files under the JFK Act, including Notwithstanding the Navy’s identification of files on Gerald P. Hemming and anti-Castro these core materials, the Review Board activists. The IRR was cooperative in deter- requested the Navy to search additional mining whether it had any files on other indi- rec o r d categories to ensure that all rel e v a n t viduals related to the assassination. In many materials had been identified. In December cases, they found no records for the names 1996, the Navy designated two officials within submitted. The Review Board requested the the Office of General Counsel to coordi n a t e IRR to determine whether it had any office or the Navy’s further search and processing of work files for certain Army intelligence offi- as s a s s i n a t i o n - r elated rec o r ds under the JFK cials located in the Dallas area in 1963–64. Act. In early 1997, after the Navy consulted The IRR stated that it had no such files. In with Review Board staff reg a r ding categories addition, the Review Board requested that of potentially relevant rec o r ds, the General the IRR provide any additional information Counsel’s office issued another search direc - or documentation with respect to an Army tive to the Chief of Naval Operations, the intelligence dossier maintained on Oswald. Commandant of the Marine Corps, the Judge The Army destroyed this file in 1973 as part Advocate General of the Navy, the Naval of a program to purge domestic surveillance Criminal Investigative Service, the Secret a r y files. The Review Board developed no new of the Navy’s Administrative Division, and information on the file or its destruction other components within the Navy. The beyond that developed by the HSCA. Review Board asked the Navy to search for files of high-level officials of the Marine The Review Board received the Final Decla- Corps, the Office of Naval Intelligence, and ration of Compliance of the Investigative the Navy during the years 1959 through 1964. Records Repository on January 23, 1998. The Navy conducted an extensive review of files, including a review of files from the Sec- 14. Department of the Navy retary of the Navy’s Administrative Office, the Chief of Naval Operations, and the Marine The Review Board considered records of the Corps. The Navy located miscellaneous docu- Department of the Navy essential in view of ments relating to the War r en Commission and Lee Harvey Oswald’s tenure with the HS C A fr om files of the Administrative Offi c e Marines, which is administratively a part of for the Secretary of the Navy as a result of this Navy. Under the JFK Act, the Navy identified se a r ch. Among the rec o r ds found was an and placed into the JFK Collection at NARA unsigned copy of an affidavit by the Direc t o r certain core files relating to Lee Harvey of ONI, prep a r ed at the time of the War re n Oswald—(1) the personnel and medical Commission, stating that Lee Harvey Oswald Marine Corps files for Oswald and (2) Office was not used as an agent or informant by of Naval Intelligence records on Oswald. ONI. The Navy confirmed that it had not, ho w e v e r , located the 1959–1964 files for the After passage of the JFK Act, the Navy’s Di r ector of ONI. Criminal Investigative Service transferred, in 1994, the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) The Department of the Navy submitted its records that had been maintained on Lee Final Declaration of Compliance dated Harvey Oswald.6 In 1995, the General Coun- December 3, 1997. sel of the Navy directed that a further review of the Navy’s files be undertaken pursuant to a. Office of Naval Intelligence. the JFK Act. This directive went to the Chief of Naval Operations, the Commandant of the The Review Board pursued the matter of ONI Marine Corps, the Naval Criminal Investiga- rec o r ds separately. Ac c o rd i n g l y , the Board tive Service, and the Naval Historical Center. requested that ONI submit its own certifica- The Navy identified no additional assassination of its compliance with the JFK Ac t . In its

157 Final Declaration of Compliance, ONI stated Finck, including two 1965 reports he prep a re d that it conducted an extensive review of ONI for General Blumberg reg a r ding the Kennedy re c o rds held at Federal Records Centers autopsy and his 1969 memorandum reg a rd i n g th r oughout the country. ONI did not identify testimony he gave at the Clay Shaw trial. The any additional assassination rec o r ds. ONI was Review Board also asked AF I P for any 1963–64 unable to find any relevant files for the Direc - files of top AF I P of ficials who might have had tor of ONI from 1959 to 1964. ONI also information reg a r ding the autopsy of Pres i d e n t acknowledged that there were additional ONI Kennedy. AFIP did locate one additional rec o r ds that were not reviewed for assassina- rec o r d, an oral history interview with Dr. tion rec o r ds, but that these rec o r ds would be Robert F. Karnei, Jr., in which he briefly dis- reviewed under Executive Order 12958 req u i r - cusses his role at the JFK autopsy. ing declassification of government rec o rd s . The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology sub- The Office of Naval Intelligence submitted its mitted its Final Declaration of Compliance Final Declaration of Compliance dated May dated June 12, 1997. 18, 1998. 16. Department of the Air Force b. National Naval Medical Center at Bethesda. In 1995, the Air Force directed certain A i r The Review Board also pursued assassination F o rce commands to undertake searches for rec o r ds with the National Naval Medical Cen- assassination re c o rds. The only assassination ter at Bethesda, Maryland (NNMC). The re c o rd found was an operations logbook NNMC was cooperative and conducted f rom A n d rews Air Force Base that had extensive searches. An unsigned original of re c o rded events at the base on the day of the the JFK autopsy report was located in a safe at assassination. The Review Board asked the the NNMC’s Anatomic Pathology Division. Air Force to conduct further searches for The NNMC located miscellaneous FOIA assassination re c o rds. The Review Board requests relating to autopsy re c o rds. The asked the Air Force to: (1) identify and Review Board asked the NNMC to re- c h e c k review the 1963–64 files for the highest off i- whether it had any 1963–64 files for the top cials in the Air Force, including the Secre t a r y of ficials of the NNMC, including Comman- of the Air Force and the Chief of Staff for the ders Humes and Boswell. Humes and Boswell Air Force; (2) more thoroughly review the we r e the Navy pathologists who conducted files of the Office of Special Investigations the autopsy of President Kennedy. The for any re c o rds related to Oswald; and (3) NNMC re-certified that it had no such files. determine whether there were any rec o rd s relating to Air Force One on November 22, The National Naval Medical Center submit- 1963, including specifically searching for any ted its Final Declaration of Compliance dated audiotapes of transmissions to or from A i r June 27, 1997, and its Supplemental Declara- F o rce One on the day of the assassination. tion of Compliance on December 23, 1997. As the Review Board requested, the A i r 15. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology F o rce conducted a targeted search. The A i r F o rce did not, however, forward additional The Review Board worked directly with the re c o rds to the JFK Collection. After the A i r Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP). F o rce submitted its Final Declaration, the AF I P designated its Ar chivist for the National B o a rd requested that the Air Force further Museum of Health and Medicine to serve as account for specific Air Force re c o rds, partic- the official responsible for conducting AF I P ’ s ularly re c o rds for the Air Force’s Office of se a r ches under the JFK Act. As with the P residential Pilot and the Historical National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, R e s e a rch Agency at Maxwell Air Force Base Maryland, the Review Board sought to identify in Alabama. The Air Force, at the time of this any rec o r ds from AF I P that might relate to the Report, had not followed up on the Review autopsy of President Kennedy (Lt. Col. Pierre B o a rd’s re q u e s t . Finck, one of the autopsy pathologists, was Chief of the Wound Ballistics Branch of A F I Pa t The Air Force submitted its Final Declaration the time). AF I P located some materials of Dr. of Compliance dated November 21, 1997.

158 17. Joint Staf f on the day of the assassination and, in addition, a WHCA memorandum providing a The Chief of the Information Management “list of telephone calls recorded by the White Division, Joint Secretariat, Joint Staff, coordi- House switchboard on 22 November 1963.” nated the Joint Staff’s compliance with the JFK Act. The Joint Staff searched its archived The Review Board further re q u e s t e d files for records of the Joint Chiefs of Staff W H C A to undertake a broad search for any from the early 1960s, including files of Joint re c o rds reflecting White House communi- Chiefs Chairmen Lyman L. Lemnitzer, cations re g a rding the assassination, includ- Maxwell Taylor, and Earle G. Wheeler. The ing any communications to or from A i r Joint Staff estimated that it spent 210 hours F o rce One on the day of the assassination. searching for assassination records in such The Commander of WHCA i n s t ructed his files. The Joint Staff allowed the Review o ffices to conduct a search for assassina- Board access to these records. t i o n - related re c o rds. WHCA located no additional assassination re c o rds. The The Joint Staff responded to the Review Review Board then requested that WHCA Board’s requests for additional information c e r t i f y, under penalty of perjury, that it had relating to Cuba and Vietnam. no other re c o rds from the 1963–64 period that might relate to the assassination. In the course of identifying relevant records, W H C A certified that it had no re c o rds fro m the Review Board learned that the Joint Staff the 1963–64 time period nor any re c o rd s had destroyed minutes and/or transcripts of relating to their disposition. meetings of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1947 to 1978. Since the re c o rds would have The White House Communications Agency included minutes of meetings in 1963 and submitted its Final Declaration of Compli- 1964 which might have been relevant to the ance dated April 22, 1998. assassination, the Review Board requested that the Joint Staff account for the destruc- 19. U.S. Postal Service tion. The Joint Staff explained that, in 1974, the Secretary for the Joint Chiefs of Staff In 1993, the Postal Service located its original ordered these materials destroyed and, at file on the Kennedy assassination investiga- that time, also established a disposition tion composed of Postal Service investiga- schedule for such records. In 1978, according tive reports re g a rding the assassination. The to the Joint Staff, the “practice of recording file had been located among the arc h i v e d meeting minutes was discontinued.. . . ” re c o rds for the Chief Postal Inspector, and the file was subsequently transferred to the The Joint Staff submitted its Final Declaration JFK Collection. The Review Board suggested of Compliance dated November 13, 1997. additional searches. The Postal Service was diligent in following those suggestions, but 18. White House Communications no additional assassination re c o rds were Agency u n c o v e re d .

The White House Communications Agency 20. Social Security Administration (WHCA) did not identify any assassination re c o rds before its first meeting with the In response to a directive in 1993 by the Review Board in early 1997. The Review Department of Health & Human Services B o a rd contacted WHCA to determine (HHS) regarding compliance with the JFK whether it retained any archived rec o rd s Act, the Social Security Administration (SSA) from 1963–64 relating to the assassination. inventoried its holdings relating to Lee Har- vey Oswald and Jack Ruby. SSA sequestered The Review Board formally requested that the records at the Review Board’s request. WHCA search for any 1963–64 records that These same SSA records were later acquired might have pertained to the assassination. by IRS and IRS deposited them in the JFK WHCA located and placed into the JFK Col- Collection, but Section 6103 of the Internal lection an historical file that contained state- Revenue Code prevents disclosure of tax ments of WHCA personnel regarding events return records.

159 In early 1997, the Review Board staff met a. NARA, Washington, D.C. with SSA to verify what assassination- related re c o rds SSA might have and to NARA has legal and physical custody of determine if any such re c o rds could be pub- numerous federal government records that licly released. The Review Board re q u e s t e d a re transferred to it by federal agencies. that SSA assemble all earnings-re l a t e d Accordingly, the JFK Act required NARA to re c o rds for Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack identify any assassination records that may R u b y, quarterly reports filed by Oswald’s have been in its legal custody at the time the employers (to verify Oswald’s employment JFK Act was passed. history and income), and the original file opened for Marina Oswald’s claim for sur- After the JFK Act was passed, NARA identi- vivor benefits following Lee Harvey fied three major record categories in its cus- Oswald’s death. tody: (1) records of the Warren Commission; (2) the main Department of Justice Criminal The SSA was extremely diligent in collecting Division file on the Kennedy assassination; and assembling these re c o rds. The SSA p ro- and (3) the main Secret Service file on the tected some of these re c o rds under Section assassination. Many of the records within 6103, but the balance were transmitted to these files were already open to the public the JFK Collection. SSA placed its assassina- when the JFK Act was passed. NARA also tion re c o rds that contain information pro- identified administrative re c o rds for the tected by Section 6103 in the JFK collection United States Archivist and Deputy Archivist w h e re they will be kept confidential by relating to the handling of assassination- NARA. The SSA confirmed that these related materials maintained by NARA, re c o rds are being pre s e r v e d . including administrative records regarding Warren Commission holdings. In addition, As with Oswald’s tax returns, the Review NARA staff identified various federal agencies that had cooperated with the Warren Board regrets that Oswald’s earnings infor- Commission and searched those records for mation and employment history, as con- assassination records. tained in employer reports on file with SSA, have not been released to the public as of the In December 1992, the Assistant Archivist date of this Report. issued a directive to the staff of NARA requesting that any other assassination- 21. Drug Enforcement Administration related records be identified. Some miscellaneous records were included in the JFK Col- The Drug Enforcement A d m i n i s t r a t i o n lection as a result of this search. In addition, (DEA) was cooperative with the Review NARA—through its Center for Legislative Board in making files available for review. In Archives—processed hundreds of boxes of May 1998, the Review Board asked DEA to Congressional records relating to the assassi- formally process certain records as assassina- nation, including most importantly the tion records under the JFK Act. In addition, records of the House Select Committee on the Review Board asked for a formal state- Assassinations (HSCA). ment of DEA’s compliance. However, DEA has taken no steps to formally designate In April 1998, staffs of the Review Board and assassination records, nor has it submitted a NARA met to review the status of NARA’s compliance report as requested. identification and release of assassination records. The Review Board asked NARA to 22. NARA and the Presidential Libraries confirm that there were no other closed re c o rds relating to the assassination that The Review Board worked separately with might be among classified or closed files of N A R A in Washington, D.C., the Federal officials of the Kennedy and Johnson Admin- Records Center in Fort Worth, Texas, the Ford istrations, including certain cabinet secre- P residential Library, the JFK Pre s i d e n t i a l taries. In addition, the Review Board had Library, and the LBJ Presidential Library. The asked NARA to coordinate with the Admin- compliance status for each of these entities is istrative Office of U.S. Courts to identify and set forth below. secure for the JFK Collection court case files

160 for various FOIA suits involving the public’s c. The Gerald R. Ford Library. request to open up CIA, FBI, and other agency files on the Kennedy assassination. The Ford Library had substantial holdings NARA has been working with the Adminis- that were relevant under the JFK Act, includ- trative Office to obtain these court files. ing files of the President’s Commission on CIA Activities within the United States (the N A R A submitted its Final Declaration of Rockefeller Commission) and papers of for- Compliance on September 14, 1998. mer President Gerald R. Ford relating to his work on the Warren Commission. The Ford b. NARA, Southwest Region. Library first identified assassination records f rom among materials that were alre a d y NARA had its Southwest regional facility open to researchers, including records from undertake searches pursuant to the JFK Act. Gerald Ford’s Congressional and Vice-Presi- That facility is a repository for federal agency dential papers and records of Ford Adminis- records in the Dallas, Texas area. Among the tration officials.8 As a result of these searches, records identified under the JFK Act by the the Ford Library transmitted approximately Southwest Region were: (1) court files from six cubic feet of records to the JFK Collection the federal district court in Dallas, Texas with in August 1993. The Ford Library also respect to litigation over the rifle used to searched its unprocessed or closed “national assassinate President Kennedy (United States security collections.” This encompassed a v. 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano Rifle and Marina review of the Rockefeller Commission files, Oswald Porter v. United States); (2) court files as well as files of President Ford’s National for the litigation brought by Claw Shaw Security Advisor and the Presidential Coun- against Jim Garrison in federal district court sel to the extent the files related to intelli- in New Orleans (Clay Shaw v. Jim Garrison); gence investigations of the mid-1970s (i.e., (3) files from the U.S Attorney in Dallas relat- the Rockefeller Commission and Churc h ing to the litigation over the Oswald rifle; Committee investigations). The Ford Library and (4) records of the criminal proceedings reviewed approximately 240,000 pages from against Jack Ruby, also obtained from the more than 20 different closed or unprocessed U.S. Attorney in Dallas. collections, and the Library selected approximately 1,400 documents (11,500 pages) for The Southwest Region also identified within p rocessing under the JFK Act. The Ford its custody various medical equipment from Library worked with the Review Board to Trauma Room No. 1 at Dallas Parkland Hos- have relevant agencies release these assassi- pital. This equipment was purchased from nation records. Dallas County in 1973 when Parkland Hospi- tal was being remodeled, and the equipment The Ford Library submitted its Final Declara- was placed in storage by NARA at its South- tion of Compliance dated August 12, 1998. west Region facility. The Review Board deferred to NARA’s decision to retain the d. The John F. Kennedy Library. equipment in storage.7 The identification of In April 1998, Review Board staff met with offi - assassination re c o rd s The National Archives and cials of the Southwest Region at its facility in within the holdings of the Records Administration (NAR A ) Fort Worth, Texas. The Review Board sought to JFK Library presented a fully supports the accelerated ascertain whether the Southwest Region had challenge to both the r e v i e w , d e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , a n d legal custody of any 1963–64 rec o r ds for vari- Library and the Review release of records related to ous law enforcement, intelligence, or military B o a rd in view of the the assassination of President agencies with offices in the Dallas reg i o n , extensive material rel a t - K e n n e d y . including Secret Service, ATF , FBI, and ONI. ing to, and originated by, —National Archives and The staff of the Southwest Region confirmed o fficials within the Records Administration, Senate that it had no such relevant rec o r ds. Kennedy administration. Hearings on JFK Act

The Southwest Region of NARA submitted its After passage of the JFK Act, the JFK Library Final Declaration of Compliance dated July s t a ff undertook an extensive review of 10, 1998. Kennedy administration re c o rds, personal

161 papers, and oral histories in its possession. In questions re g a rding the Library’s re c o rd p a r t i c u l a r, the JFK Library reviewed its searches and its work under the JFK Act. The closed or “unprocessed” holdings to identify questions were to be answered by Library assassination re c o rds. Among the rec o rd s officials, under penalty of perjury, in the reviewed by the JFK Library staff were Presi- Library’s Final Declaration of Compliance. dent Kennedy’s National Security files and The Library submitted its Final Declaration office files. The Library staff also reviewed of Compliance shortly thereafter. The JFK material made available to investigative bod- Library certified that “[a]ll records of Presi- ies in the 1970s such as the Church Commit- dent Kennedy, Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, tee. In addition, the Review Board staff, with Evelyn Lincoln, and Robert F. Kennedy in the the Library, reviewed the classified Attorney custody of the Library have been reviewed General file series of Robert F. Kennedy. The under the JFK Act.” The Library also stated JFK Library staff reviewed numerous collec- that further review of Robert F. Kennedy’s tions of records from Kennedy administra- papers had resulted in the identification of tion officials, as well as numerous oral his- additional assassination records that would tory interviews of such officials. The Library be processed for release. In addition, approx- processed many of these records as assassi- imately 150 RFK documents previously iden- nation records. tified for release were still in the process of declassification or review by the RFK Donor As of March 1995, the JFK Library had trans- Committee at the time of this Report.9 While mitted to the JFK Collection 33,000 pages of recognizing the extensive work of the JFK documents identified under the JFK A c t . Library and its significant contribution to the These included papers of President Kennedy, JFK Collection, the Review Board was disap- Robert F. Kennedy, C. Douglas Dillon, pointed in the delay in identification and Th e o d o r e Sorenson, Burke Marshall, David release of RFK papers. Bro d e r , Chet Huntley, and Arthur Schlesinger. In addition, rec o r ds from the Kennedy White The JFK Library, at its suggestion, briefed the House were also transmitted. These included members of the Review Board in August rec o r ds from the National Security files, the 1998 with respect to the work of the Library White House Central Subject files, and the under the JFK Act. At that presentation, the Pr esident’s Office files. The Library also sent Review Board was given assurances by the all or parts of numerous oral history inter- Library, in the strongest terms, that it was views to the extent that these interviews committed to completing release of all assas- touched upon the Kennedy assassination. sination-related records, including the RFK Additional materials were sent later, includ- records.10 ing Teddy White’s “Camelot papers,” which contained notes of his interview with Jacque- The JFK Library submitted its Final Declara- line Kennedy for Life magazine, and Evelyn tion of Compliance dated August 18, 1998. Lincoln’s rec o r ds consisting of log books, daily diaries, and appointment books for e. The Lyndon B. Johnson Library. Pr esident Kennedy. Finally, the JFK Library has stated that all remaining closed Dictabelts The LBJ Library has extensive rec o r ds that of President Kennedy’s telephone conversa- we r e reviewed pursuant to the JFK Act. The tions, as well as 25 hours of audio rec o rd i n g s Library holds 505 collections of personal of President Kennedy’s meetings, will be papers, 59 bodies of federal rec o r ds, and 1,227 released this fall. The JFK Library committed p rocessed and deeded oral history inter- to releasing all remaining audio rec o r dings of views. Even before the JFK Act was passed in Kennedy meetings by 1999 under Executive 1992, the Library, beginning in 1980, identi- Or der 12958. fied and made available materials that it had relating to the assassination of Pre s i d e n t The Review Board attempted to ensure that Ke n n e d y .11 In 1993, the LBJ Library transmit- the Library had reviewed and identified all ted to the JFK Collection material on the relevant records in its custody, particularly assassination from the LBJ White House Cen- records that were closed and unavailable to tral files, White House Confidential files, and researchers. The Review Board submitted to the National Security files; the Library’s “Spe- the JFK Library, in July 1998, a detailed set of cial File on the Assassination of Pres i d e n t

162 K e n n e d y,” which was assembled by the was made because NARA, until 1984, was White House in late 1966 as a ref e r ence file to under the auspices of GSA. Therefore, the respond to William Manchester’s book, Th e Review Board wanted to ensure that GSAdid Death of a Pres i d e n t ; Pr esident Johnson’s daily not have records relating to NARA’s han- diary rec o r ds listing his appointments and dling of Warren Commission materials or the phone calls made during the period following handling of the JFK autopsy photos and x- the assassination; office files of various White rays. GSA did identify files for the top offi- House aides; White House telephone offi c e cials of GSA from the 1960s but these were rec o r ds; personal papers of Under Secret a r y already at NARA and fully available to the of State George Ball, Attorney General Ram- public. GSA did not transfer any records to sey Clark, and John Connally; and numerou s the JFK Collection. oral history interviews. The LBJ Library also released tapes of President Johnson’s conver- GSA submitted its Final Declaration of Com- sations relating to the assassination (dating pliance dated January 26, 1998. mostly from 1963, 1964, and 1967—the time of the Garrison investigation and publication of C. CONGRESSIONAL RECORDS the Manchester book). In addition to executive branch records, the In the Spring of 1997, the Review Board staff Review Board worked with various congres- conducted a comprehensive review of LBJ sional committees, and NARA, to ensure dis- Library National Security Files (NSF), closed c l o s u re of various congressional re c o rd s oral histories thought to be related to the relating to the assassination. The most impor- assassination, and various manuscripts, tant record groups in this regard were the archives and office files of key officials. The records of the two congressional committees s t a ff identified more than 300 additional that conducted independent investigations of assassination re c o rds. The Review Board P resident Kennedy’s assassination—the coordinated with various agencies in declas- Church Committee in 1975–76 and the House sifying these records. Select Committee on Assassinations in 1977–79. In addition, the Review Board Finally, the LBJ Library committed to releasing tapes of all of President Johnson’s sought to ascertain whether there were rele- re c o rded telephone conversations thro u g h vant records among certain other Congres- October 1964 by September 1998. This release sional Committees. will include six previously closed recordings of President Johnson’s telephone conversa- 1. The House Select Committee on tions with Jacqueline Kennedy in December Assassinations (the HSCA) 1963 and January 1964. The LBJ Library will also release additional telephone conversa- The files of the HSCA embody the collections identified as assassination-re l a t e d , tive work of that Committee in investigating including two involving McGeorge Bundy. the assassinations of President Kennedy and The Library plans to continue release of the the Reverend Martin Luther King. A f t e r LBJ tapes (post-October, 1964) in chronologi- issuance of the HSCA’s report in 1979, the cal order, and has represented that additional voluminous files of the HSCA w e re placed conversations relating to the assassination in storage and were to be kept under seal will be forwarded to the JFK Collection. until 2029 (i . e ., fifty years from 1979). Because these were Congressional re c o rd s , The LBJ Library submitted its Final Declara- they were not subject to disclosure under tion of Compliance dated August 27, 1998. the FOIA. Oliver Stone’s film, J F K, under- s c o red the existence of these closed files and 23. General Services Administration the fact that they would not be re l e a s e d until 2029. After passage of the JFK A c t , The General Services Administration (GSA) N A R A made the opening of the HSCA f i l e s conducted no records searches under the JFK the highest priorities. NARA opened the JFK Act. The Review Board asked GSA in 1997 to assassination portion of the HSCA re c o rd s determine whether it might have records after consulating with the agencies that had relating to the assassination. This approach equities in the re c o rd s .

163 2. Senate Select Committee to Study released under the JFK Act were Secretary of Governmental Operations with Defense Robert McNamara; Deputy Secre- Respect to Intelligence Activities tary of Defense Roswell Gilpatric; Special (the Church Committee) Assistant for National Security McGeorge Bundy; former Directors of Central Intelli- Records of the Church Committee, like the gence John McCone, Richard Helms, and HSCA records, were of high public interest. William Colby; Deputy Director of Central The Review Board made extensive efforts to Intelligence Marshall Carter; CIAofficer John e n s u re the fullest disclosure of re l e v a n t Scelso (alias); Secret Service Chief James records. The Church Committee, in 1975–76, Rowley; Assistant FBI Director Alex Rosen; investigated a range of issues involving the FBI Special Agent in Charge for the Dallas operations of the intelligence agencies. Many Field Office Gordon Shanklin; and FBI Agent of these issues fell outside the scope of the James Hosty. JFK Act, but the Church Committee investigated the Kennedy assassination and the While the SSCI had been successful in obtain- issue of assassination of foreign leaders. ing the microfilmed transcripts requested by the Board, the Review Board remained con- After passage of the JFK Act, the Senate cerned that the original hardcopy transcripts Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) for this testimony, and any accompanying inventoried the original re c o rds of the materials, had not been located by the SSCI Church Committee (some 450 boxes) and or otherwise accounted for. The Review transmitted approximately 40 boxes of assas- Board asked for access to all 450 boxes of sination-related records to the JFK Collection. original Church Committee files. Again, SSCI This represented a significant effort by the was cooperative and arranged to have the Committee, as well as by the agencies that original Church Committee files available for reviewed and declassified the re c o rd s . the Board’s inspection (the originals had not NARA, however, surveyed the re c o rd s previously been reviewed by the staffs of placed in the Collection and concluded that NARA or the Review Board). The Review testimony directly relevant to the Kennedy Board staff inspected all the original files, assassination (and cited in the Kennedy and additional materials were designated as assassination report of the Church Commit- assassination re c o rds. However, the hard tee) was not included in the released materi- copy of testimony cited in the JFK Assassina- als. For approximately two years, the SSCI tion Report was not among the materials. did not explain or rectify this crucial gap in Although microfilm copies of this testimony the records provided to NARA. were available, the Review Board specifically asked the SSCI to explain the absence of the In 1997, the Review Board wrote to the SSCI hard copy files, particularly since they were a and, again, raised the issue of identifying and discrete and significant body of records relat- processing testimony directly relevant to the ing to the Kennedy assassination. At the time C h u rch Committee’s investigation of the of this Report, the SSCI could not explain the Kennedy assassination, as well as testimony absence of these original transcripts (and per- re g a rding alleged CIA assassination plots haps accompanying materials) relating to the against foreign leaders. The SSCI was coop- Kennedy assassination. erative and diligent in attempting to locate and forward the specific transcripts that had 3. House Select Committee on been identified by the Review Board and Intelligence (the Pike Committee) NARA. Throughout 1997–98, the SSCI identified and produced scores of micro f i l m e d In 1975, the Pike Committee investigated var- copies of the requested transcripts. This testi- ious issues regarding the intelligence com- mony was processed and placed into the JFK munity. The Pike Committee also looked into Collection. The transcripts include testimony certain discrete, limited issues regarding the of FBI and CIA officials who worked on the assassination of President Kennedy. The Pike JFK assassination investigation, as well as Committee records have been under the cus- officials who testified regarding the alleged tody of the House Permanent Select Commit- assassination plots against Fidel Castro . tee on Intelligence (HPSCI). HPSCI identified Among the officials whose testimony was approximately three boxes of assassination-

164 related records of the Pike Committee and Oswald, Marina Oswald, the Fair Play for has placed them into the JFK Collection. Cuba Committee (FPCC), and Mark Lane (a Wa r ren Commission critic). Under House 4. House Judiciary Subcommittee on Rules, investigative rec o r ds of a House com- Civil & Constitutional Rights, mittee may be closed for fifty years after the Chaired by Congressman Don committee finishes their investigation and Edwards (the Edwards Subcommittee) shuts down.

In 1975 and 1976, the Edwards Subcommittee In November 1996, the Review Board investigated the FBI’s destruction of a note requested that Congress make these records that Lee Harvey Oswald delivered to the Dal- available for inspection by the Review Board las Field Office prior to the assassination of to confirm whether the records initially iden- Pr esident Kennedy. The Review Board raised tified by NARA s t a ff were assassination with NARA’s Center for Legislative Arc h i v e s records and should be released to the public. the issue of whether they had any original The Review Board received no responses and files for this subcommittee. The Legislative raised the matter again in 1997. In January Ar chives staff could not identify any such files 1998, the Clerk’s Office sought permission within its Judiciary Committee rec o r ds. The from the Judiciary Committee to open up the Review Board also asked the Clerk’s Office of HUAC files for Review Board inspection. The the House of Representatives for assistance in Judiciary Committee initially denied the locating these rec o r ds. Unfortunately, no orig- Board’s request, but upon reconsideration inal rec o r ds for this subcommittee have been ultimately agreed to release substantial located, although copies of some of these HUAC files relating to the JFK assassination. rec o r ds can be found in the HSCA Collection. 7. Library of Congress 5. House Government Operation’ s Subcommittee on Government The Library of Congress did not transmit any Information and Individual Rights, assassination rec o r ds to the JFK Collection Chaired by Congresswoman Bella after passage of the Act. In June 1994, the Abzug (the Abzug Subcommittee) Library of Congress responded to an inquiry by the Review Board and reported that it had In 1975 and 1976, the Abzug Subcommittee located no assassination-related re c o rd s looked into issues relating to access to War- within the classified holdings in its Manu- ren Commission records and the destruction script Division. In 1996, the Review Board of FBI records. It was the Review Board’s asked the Library of Congress, including the understanding that these records remained Co n g r essional Research Service, to ensure that closed pursuant to House Rules. In 1996, and it had searched for any non-public rec o r ds in again in 1997, the Review Board sought Con- its custody that might relate to the assassina- gressional authorization to have any assassi- tion. The Library of Congress took no action nation-related records within the Abzug Sub- on the Review Board’s request, and the Board committee files reviewed and released under made another formal request in October 1997. the JFK Act. After receiving the appropriate The Congressional Research Service deferred C o n g ressional authorization, the Review compliance with the JFK Act pending explicit Board staff inspected the original files of the Co n g r essional authorization. Aside from CRS, Abzug Subcommittee and designated vari- ho w e v e r , the Library of Congress undertook ous materials for release under the JFK Act. to survey its non-public holdings to identify rec o r ds relating to the assassination. This 6. House Un-American Activities entailed review of the Library’s closed rec o rd s Committee (HUAC) in its Manuscript Division.

During the 1950s and 1960s, this Committee The Library of Congress filed a formal state- investigated “un-American” activities of vari- ment of compliance with the Review Board ous individuals and groups. In the summer of and identified three sets of closed records 1996, the staff of NARA’s Center for Legisla- containing assassination-related materials: tive Ar chives did an initial survey of the (1) a “duplicate and partial” set of Rocke- HUAC files and identified files on Lee Harvey feller Commission records donated by Vice-

165 President Rockefeller and closed until March investigated labor practices in the late 1950s; 25, 2002; (2) papers of Senator Daniel Moyni- then Senator John Kennedy was a member of han from his tenure as Assistant Secretary of the committee and Robert F. Kennedy was Labor in the Kennedy Administration; and Chief Counsel. The records of the committee (3) papers of Howard Liebengood, an aide to include information on organized crime fig- Senator Howard Baker, who did work relat- ures. It was determined that the records of ing to the assassination for the Senate Intelli- the committee did not qualify as assassina- gence Committee. The Library also identified tion records under the JFK Act. relevant collections that were pre v i o u s l y open to the public, including papers of Earl The Review Board surveyed the indices to Wa r ren, David Atlee Phillips, and Elmer 1949–51 records of the Senate Special Com- Gertz (attorney for Jack Ruby). In addition, mittee to investigate Organized Crime in the Library had one piece of correspondence Interstate Commerce (the Kefauver Commit- written by Lee Harvey Oswald while he was tee). Given the remoteness in time from the in the Soviet Union. events of the assassination, no records of the Kefauver Committee were designated as Once the relevant closed materials were iden- assassination re c o rds. More o v e r, Congre s s tified, the Review Board sought the donors’ has authorized NARA to open these records permission to open the records. The Review in 2001. Board obtained Senator Moynihan’s agreement to open his papers relating to the assas- The Review Board and NARA i d e n t i f i e d sination, and the Board has been in the certain re c o rds of the Senate Judiciary’s Sen- process of obtaining Mr. Liebengood’s con- ate Internal Security Subcommittee (the sent. The Library of Congress stated that its Eastland Committee) for review under the Rockefeller Commission records were dupli- JFK Act. Thirteen transcripts of executive cates of the Rockefeller Commission files at session testimony were subsequently identi- the Ford Library. The Ford Library reviewed fied for release under the JFK Act. These and processed assassination records from the w e re processed by the Center for Legislative Rockefeller Commission under the JFK Act. A rchives and transmitted to the JFK Collec- The Review Board has requested the Library tion. The re c o rds included 1961 testimony of of Congress to ascertain whether its set of the Edwin Walker and December 1963 testi- Rockefeller Commission papers contains any mony of Ruth Paine. In addition, the Center assassination-related materials that have not for Legislative A rchives transmitted to the been released by the Ford Library. JFK Collection three boxes of press clippings re g a rding Lee Harvey Oswald and the In the Summer of 1998, the Congres s i o n a l a s s a s s i n a t i o n . Re s e a r ch Service (CRS) identified one box of memoranda relating to the assassination that D. CONCLUSION we r e prep a r ed by CRS for the HSCA and other entities. Having received appropriate Congres - Generally, government offices attempted to sional authorization, CRS has agreed to for- s e a rch for and release their assassination wa r d these materials to the JFK Collection. records in compliance with the JFK Act. Most importantly, this was the case with the major 8. Other Congressional Records agencies, such as the FBI, CIA, Department of State, Department of Justice, Secret Service, The NARA and Review Board staffs also NARA, and the Presidential Libraries, that examined certain other Congre s s i o n a l would be expected to have core materials records to identify any materials that might relating to the assassination. In some cases, be considered “assassination-related” under particular agencies conducted searches after the JFK Act. the Review Board notified them of their obligations. The Review Board was given appropriate Congressional authorization to inspect files By initiating a compliance program, the of the Senate Select Committee on Improper Board decided to require the relevant agen- Activities in the Labor or Management Field cies to affirmatively document their work (the Mclellan Committee). This committee under the JFK Act, including certification

166 that they had conducted diligent searches for assassination records. The individual officials who represented the agencies were pro- fessional and cooperative in meeting the substantive and procedural requirements of the Board’s compliance program.

With some limited exceptions, almost all of the federal entities this chapter discusses have explained and certified, under penalty of perjury, their efforts to locate and release all relevant records on the assassination of P resident Kennedy. The Board anticipates that these statements, under oath, will enhance the public’s confidence that the United States government, in good faith, attempted to release all re c o rds on the Kennedy assassination.

167 CHAPTER 8 ENDNOTES

1 House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Economic and Commercial Law, Assassination Materials Disclosure Act of 1992: Hearings on H.J. 454, 102 Cong., 2d sess., 1992. (Opening statement by Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. 2 44 U.S.C. § 2107 (2)(a)(3). 3 Many of the descriptions of agency’s efforts to comply with the JFK Act were obtained from the initial or final certifications that the agencies submitted to the Review Board. 4 At its peak in 1994, the FBI’s JFK Task Force had more than 90 employees working on assassination records processing. 5 In the spring of 1997, Marina Oswald provided limited consent to the IRS to release Lee Harvey Oswald’s tax returns to researchers Ray and Mary La Fontaine. Marina Oswald declared her intent to have the La Fontaines release these returns to the public, but to our knowledge they have not done so. Absent Marina Oswald’s consent, the IRS is legally oblig- ated under Section 6103 to withhold the Oswald tax returns from public disclosure. 6 Copies of these ONI rec o r ds were also located in the files of the HSCA, and they were released along with the other HSCA fi l e s . 7 In addition to records identified by the Southwest Region of NARA, the Southeast Region had identified some papers of Senator Richard Russell relating to his work on the Warren Commission. (NARA had been providing courtesy storage for these papers on behalf of the University of Georgia.) 8 Among the Ford papers transmitted to the JFK Collection were excerpts of interviews with President Ford conducted by Trevor Armbrister in connection with the writing of Ford’s memoirs, ATime to Heal. 9 The Robert F. Kennedy Donor Committee controls access to all RFK papers under a Deed of Gift agreement with the JFK Library. 10 In addition, the JFK Library is releasing the RFK and other papers pursuant to the declassification requirements of Executive Order 12958. 11 These materials were identified in a detailed index entitled, “Guide to Materials from the Johnson Library Pertaining to the Assassination of John F. Kennedy.”

168