A. INTRODUCTION

Are federal agencies cooperating fully,or is there resistance that fosters publicdistrust of the government?1

The John F. Kennedy Assassination RecordsCollection Act of 1992 (JFK Act) directed fed-eral agencies to search for re c o rds re l a t i n gto the assassination of President Kennedyand to transfer those re c o rds to the John F.Kennedy Assassination Records Collection(JFK Collection) at the National A rc h i v e sand Records Administration (NARA) forpublic disclosure. As explained earlier inthis report, agencies began their complianceactivities even before the Senate confirmedthe nomination of the A s s a s s i n a t i o nR e c o rds Review Board members in 1994.Once the Review Board convened, itassessed the efforts of federal agencies tocomply with the terms of the JFK Act.

In late 1996, the Review Board initiated a for-mal program to ensure that all re l e v a n tagencies were complying with the JFK A c t .The Review Board used its compliance pro-gram to ensure that government offices ful-filled their JFK Act obligations. The pro g r a mre q u i red agencies to certify that:

(1) the agency conducted a thoro u g hs e a rch for assassination re c o rds as thatterm is defined by the JFK Act and theReview Board’s regulation further definingthe term;

(2) the agency identified, organized, andreviewed its assassination records;

(3) the agency prepared its assassinationrecords for public release at NARA;

(4) the agency responded to each of theReview Board’s requests for additional infor-mation and records; and

(5) the agency transmitted its assassinationrecords to NARA.

Chapter 6 of this Report describes both theReview Board’s requests for additional infor-mation and records to federal agencies andfederal agencies’ responses to those requests.

The Review Board’s compliance pro g r a mstressed agency obligations to search for andpublicly release records relating to PresidentKennedy’s assassination. As part of its com-pliance program, the Review Board askedeach agency to submit a declaration, underpenalty of perjury, describing the re c o rdsearches that it completed, the assassinationrecords that it located, and any other actionsit took to release assassination records. TheReview Board established the complianceprogram in furtherance of the JFK Act’s man-date that there be “an enforceable, indepen-dent and accountable process for the publicdisclosure” of records on the Kennedy assas-sination.2

The Review Board worked extensively withagency personnel to resolve outstandingcompliance issues prior to submission ofFinal Declarations of Compliance.

B. FEDERAL AGENCY COMPLIANCE WITH THEJFK A CT

Each section of this chapter describes workthat a particular agency completed, bothbefore and during the Review Board’s exis-tence.3

1. Central Intelligence Agency

The Review Board considered the CIA’s com-pliance with the JFK Act, including completedisclosure of all CIA records relating to LeeHarvey Oswald and the Kennedy assassina-tion, to be one of its highest priorities.

The CIA complied with the JFK Act throughthe auspices of the Agency’s Historical

145

CHAPTER 8CO 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 OF F I C E S

Review Program (previously the HistoricalReview Group or HRG). HRP reviewed doc-uments, re f e r red documents within CIA,answered questions, negotiated issues withthe Review Board staff, and, after Board vot-ing, processed documents for release toNARA. The HRP reviewers were all CIAannuitants, with twenty years or more expe-rience, working as independent contractors.Beginning with a 14-member staff in 1992,the staff grew steadily to 29 reviewers andnine administrative personnel by the sum-mer of 1998. HRP also drew on the resourcesof numerous other offices at CIA for recordsearches, answers to Review Board ques-tions, and the provision of records for inspec-

tion by the Board. From1992 until December 1997,HRG functioned as part ofthe Center for Studies inIntelligence and its Chiefwas the Director of Cen-tral Intelligence’s per-sonal re p resentative to theReview Board. In January1998, the CIA’s re o rg a n i-zation renamed HRG theHistorical Review Pro-gram and moved it to joinother CIA d e c l a s s i f i c a t i o ne fforts in the Office ofInformation Managem e n t .

In 1992 and 1993, the CIA’s Historical ReviewGroup proceeded to assemble CIA recordsrelating to the assassination. In early 1992,prior to enactment of the JFK Act, the Chiefof the History Staff located and inventoriedthe CIA records on the assassination that CIAheld pursuant to an agreement between theC I A and the HSCA (the CIA–HSCAsequestered collection). This material com-prised 64 boxes. In addition, the History Staffsecured the 16 boxes of the original Lee Har-vey Oswald 201 file. Following passage ofthe JFK Act, the CIA reviewed and declassi-fied with numerous redaction the Oswald201 file and files within the CIA–HSCAsequestered collection, and in 1993 the CIAtransmitted those records to the JFK Collec-tion at NARA.

In October 1993, the CIA’s HRG requested thevarious CIA d i rectorates to search for addi-tional re c o rds on Lee Harvey Oswald and onthe JFK assassination. (The directorates were

the Directorate of Operations, the Dire c t o r a t eof Intelligence, the Directorate of A d m i n i s t r a-tion, and the Directorate of Science & Te c h-n o l o g y.) As a result of this search dire c t i v e ,the CIA identified 31 boxes of potentiallyresponsive re c o rds, and these were for-w a rded to the HRG for review under the JFKAct. Included were 19 boxes of working fileson the Kennedy assassination by CIA o ff i c e rRuss Holmes (for many years he was theAgency’s focal point officer with re s p o n s i b i l i t yfor responding to questions related to CIA’ sKennedy assassination-related re c o rds); twoboxes on KGB defector Yuri Nosenko; sevenboxes of Latin American Division re c o rd s ;and three boxes related to the Bay of Pigs. TheReview Board identified 22 boxes as re s p o n-sive under the JFK Act, although many of there c o rds were duplicates of re c o rds containedin the Oswald 201 file or the CIA–HSCAs e q u e s t e red collection files.

The Review Board requested numerous cate-gories of additional CIA records in an effortto ensure the most complete disclosure ofinformation relating to the Kennedy assassi-nation. The Review Board made 16 formalrequests in writing, and 37 informal requests,for additional information and records fromthe CIA.

In anticipation of the Review Board ’ srequests for additional information andrecords, the CIA, in April 1995, requestedeach directorate and the DCI administrativeofficer “to appoint a focal point officer” forthe JFK Act. Review Board inquiries werereferred by the HRG to the appropriate CIAoffice. A number of CIA officers facilitatedthe difficult processes of securing access toCIA files, as well as negotiating issues relat-ing to the release of records. The Board foundthat, whenever it and its staff were able todeal directly with knowledgeable expertsthroughout the Agency on substantive issuesor records, more often than not the result wasa mutually acceptable release or postpone-ment. These compromises reasonably bal-anced the public interest in disclosure withlegitimate needs for continued secrecy onlimited issues. The Review Board encoun-tered early CIA resistance to making recordsavailable to the Review Board, as well asresistance to the ultimate disclosure ofrecords. A small number of CIA staff officers,almost exclusively from the Directorate of

146

[T]he only thing more horrify-ing to me than the assassinationitself is the insidious, perversenotion that elements of theAmerican Government, that myown Agency, had some part init. I am determined personallyto make public or to expose todisinterested eyes every relevantscrap of paper in CIA’s posses-sion, in the hope of helping todispel this corrosive suspicion.—CIA Director Robert Gates,May 12, 1992

Operations, unnecessarily impeded theprocess and damaged the Agency’s interestsby resisting compromise with all-or-nothingpositions.

In response to the Review Board requests, theBoard staff was granted access to revieworiginal, unsanitized CIA f i l e s — i n c l u d i n goriginal files of the highest officials at CIAduring the time of the assassination—to con-firm the existence (or non-existence) of mate-rials relating to the assassination. Since theCIAfiles covered other matters in addition tothe assassination, the CIA was initially reluc-tant to provide whole files for Review Boardinspection. In order to obtain access to certainsets of files, and thus examine them in theiroriginal form, the Review Board agreed tolimit access to one or two Board staff mem-bers. The Board believed that agreeing to thislimitation was of practical benefit because itsecured access to entire original sets of files.

As a result of the Review Board’s requestsand inspection of various CIA files, theReview Board staff identified additionalmaterials relating to the assassination inaddition to those initially identified in 1992and 1993.

In 1997, the CIA provided the Review Boardstaff with several briefings by representativesof each directorate with respect to their filesand re c o rd keeping systems and theirsearches for assassination-related records. Inits searches for records on the assassination,the CIA conducted both manual and elec-tronic database searches. In 1998, the ReviewBoard expressed to the CIA concern regard-ing the thoroughness of CIA’s initial 1992–93record searches. The Review Board’s concernarose out of the CIA’s belated discovery ofseveral files relating directly to Lee HarveyOswald, including (a) a multi-volume Officeof Security file on Oswald; (b) a previouslyundisclosed continuation of the Oswald 201file containing a small number of documentspost-dating the 1977–78 HSCA investigation;(c) another, small file on Oswald designatedby the CIA as an “A” file; and (d) additionalrecords relating to a KGB source with infor-mation relating to Lee and Marina Oswald.None of these files had been identified by theCIA in 1992–93, when the CIA first assem-bled its files on the Kennedy assassination.These files were located through Review

Board inquiries regarding specific records.The Review Board was disturbed by thebelated discovery of these records, particu-larly given its mandate to assure the publicthat all relevant materials on the Kennedyassassination were being released by the U.S.government.

In an effort to ensure that the CIA had con-ducted thorough and adequate searc h e sunder the JFK Act, the Review Board specifi-cally requested that CIA D i rector Georg eTenet issue a directive to all components ofCIA requesting that they identify any recordsrelating to the assassination. Director Tenetissued the directive. Other measures weresuggested by the Review Board, and thesew e re undertaken by CIA. In particular,offices most likely to contain assassinationrecords (e.g., Counter- Intelligence and LatinAmerican Division) were asked to conducttargeted searches following Review Boardguidelines.

The Executive Dire c t o r, the third highestlevel official of the CIA, certified under oaththat the CIAhad fully complied with the JFKAct. In its Final Declaration of Compliance,the CIA stated that each of its directorates, aswell as the official responsible for the DCIa rea, had certified that “their re s p e c t i v eoffices or directorates [had] properly andfully responded to requests from the Board.”CIA further represented, under oath, that ithad “made diligent searches to locate anddisclose. . . all records in its possession relat-ing to Lee Harvey Oswald and the assassina-tion of President Kennedy” and that it was“ a w a re of no other assassination-re l a t e drecords in its possession being withheld.. . . ”The Central Intelligence Agency submittedits Final Declaration of Compliance datedSeptember 24, 1998.

2. Federal Bureau of Investigation

The Federal Bureau of Investigation identi-fied its primary files on the Kennedy assassi-nation in the 1970s in response to publicrequests for disclosure under the Freedom ofInformation Act. These re c o rds, re f e r red to bythe FBI as the “core and related” files, consistof headquarters and field office files on thefollowing subjects: Lee Harvey Oswald, JackR u b y, the JFK assassination investigation, theFBI administrative file on the Wa r ren Com-

147

mission, Marina Oswald, Ruth Paine, Georg ede Mohrenshildt, Clay Shaw, David Ferrie,the FBI administrative file on the Churc hCommittee, and the FBI administrative file onthe House Select Committee on A s s a s s i n a-tions. The FBI established its JFK Task Forc e(which consisted of five document re v i e w-

e r s )4 in 1992 as Congre s sdebated legislation toaccelerate disclosure ofall re c o rds related to theassassination of Pre s i d e n tK e n n e d y. The FBI con-ducted re c o rds searc h e sof the core and re l a t e d

subjects in its Central Records System and itsautomated electronic surveillance index(ELSUR Index) to determine that they hadg a t h e red all core and related files in FBI head-quarters and field offices.

The FBI identified a second major category ofrecords to be processed under the JFK Actwhich the FBI refers to as the “HSCA Sub-jects.” In its investigation of the Kennedyassassination, the House Select Committeeon Assassinations (HSCA) requested accessto records responsive to FBI searches on morethan 600 different subjects. The HSCA cast awide net in its investigation, and the HSCAsubjects range from individuals who haddirect contact with Lee Harvey Oswald tomajor figures in organized crime and anti-Castro Cuban political activity. The HSCAsecured an agreement from the FBI in 1978that the Bureau would retain the HSCA sub-jects as a “sequestered collection” whichwould be filed as a set of records apart fromthe FBI’s central records system.

All of these records (the core and related filesand the HSCA subjects) were identified, andthe FBI had begun its JFK Act processingprior to the appointment of the ReviewBoard. The FBI delivered its first shipment ofassassination records to the JFK Collection inDecember 1993. As of September 30, 1998, theFBI has made 22 shipments of assassinationrecords to the JFK Collection.

As described in Chapters 4 and 5 of thisreport, the Review Board streamlined itsreview processes in 1997 to ensure that allassassination records would be reviewed bythe close of the Review Board’s term. In thespring and summer of 1997, the FBI assured

the Review Board that it would attempt tofinish its processing of assassination recordsas a result of the streamlined processes. InMarch 1998, the FBI wrote a letter to theReview Board stating that it did not expect tofinish its assassination re c o rds pro c e s s i n guntil February 2000. After a series of meet-ings between the Review Board and the FBI,the FBI again committed to finishing its JFKAct processing before the end of September1998.

The Review Board formally submitted to theFBI more than 50 requests for additionalre c o rds. In response to the Board’s re q u e s t s ,the FBI made its original files available. In alimited number of instances, the Bureau pro-vided documentation on those files that wered e s t royed according to the FBI’s re c o rds re t e n-tion schedule. The Review Board designatedthousands of documents for assassinationre c o rds processing as a result of these re q u e s t s .

In January 1997 and again in April 1998, thestaff of the Review Board met with the FBI toa d d ress any outstanding matters withrespect to the Bureau’s compliance with theJFK Act. The compliance program with theFBI focused primarily on the scope of theFBI’s searches under the JFK Act. The ReviewBoard staff raised additional records issues,including the identification of any workingfiles of top FBI officials with responsibilityfor overseeing the investigation of theKennedy assassination and accounting for allrelevant electronic surveillance that relatedto the assassination. Acting on the ReviewBoard’s concerns, the FBI requested all FBIHeadquarters Divisions to conduct searchesfor any materials not retrievable through theFBI central records system and for recordsthat may have been maintained by top FBIofficials. While the FBI has discovered somenew assassination records as a result of thissearch, they have not found any workingfiles maintained by top FBI officials from theearly 1960s.

On the issue of electronic surveillance, the FBIrequested all 56 of its field offices to identifyany electronic surveillance in which assassina-t i o n - related figures were either speaking, orre f e r red to, in conversations monitored by theFBI. The FBI searched its ELSUR indices underthe core file subjects. The FBI certified that itidentified only one instance where a core sub-

148

The FBI is absolutely committedto achieving the maximum dis-closure of JFK material.—FBI Director Louis J. Freeh,November 24, 1993

ject was a target of FBI electronic surveillance,and that was the electronic surveillance ofMarina Oswald in Dallas following the assas-sination. All other responsive electronic sur-veillance identified by the FBI consisted of so-called “overhears,” where a person ismentioned in a conversation. Nonetheless, theFBI certified that these would be re v i e w e dand processed under the JFK Act.

The FBI has a well-indexed, centralized filingsystem, and the FBI’s official main files onthe Kennedy assassination were readily iden-tified and processed under the JFK Act. Thebulk of FBI records relating to the assassina-tion have been placed in the JFK Collection.However, at the time of this Report, the FBIwas still processing some additional materi-als for inclusion in the JFK Collection.

The FBI submitted its Final Declaration ofCompliance on August 20, 1998.

3. Secret Service

The Secret Service transferred its official casefile on the Kennedy assassination to NARAin 1979.

In December 1992, after the JFK Act waspassed, the Assistant Director for the SecretService Office of Administration directed theSecret Service to inventory its records in anattempt to locate records relating to the assas-sination. In response, the Chief of the PolicyAnalysis & Records Systems Branch withinthe Office of Administration reviewed theinventories of Secret Service records in stor-age. Secret Service made these inventories, aswell as archive re c o rds, available to theReview Board staff for inspection. In 1995,the Assistant Director for the Office ofAdministration instructed each A s s i s t a n tDirector and the Chief Counsel to search forassassination-related records. In December1996, the same Assistant Director issuedanother search directive to each employee.

In addition to the Secret Service’s search of itsa rchival re c o rds, the Review Board submittedto the Secret Service more than twenty sepa-rate requests for re c o rds. The Secret Servicewas generally cooperative in making therequested re c o rds available to the ReviewB o a rd. As a result of the Service’s owns e a rches, as well as Review Board requests for

re c o rds, the Secret Service identified, as assas-sination re c o rds under the JFK Act, additionalmaterials beyond those contained in the off i-cial case file for the Kennedy assassination.

C o n g ress passed the JFK Act of 1992. Onemonth later, the Secret Service began its com-pliance efforts. However, in January 1995, theS e c ret Service destroyed presidential pro t e c-tion survey reports for some of Pre s i d e n tKennedy’s trips in the fall of 1963. The ReviewB o a rd learned of the destruction appro x i-mately one week after the Secret Serviced e s t royed them, when the Board was draftingits request for additional information. TheB o a rd believed that the Secret Service files onthe President’s travel in the weeks pre c e d i n ghis murder would be re l e v a n t .

The Review Board requested the Secret Serviceto explain the circumstances surrounding thed e s t ruction, after passage of the JFK Act. TheS e c ret Service formally explained the circ u m-stances of this destruction in corre s p o n d e n c eand an oral briefing to the Review Board.

The Review Board also sought to account forcertain additional re c o rd categories thatmight relate to the Kennedy assassination.For example, the Review Board sought infor-mation regarding a protective intelligencefile on the Fair Play for Cuba Committee(FPCC) and regarding protective intelligencefiles relating to threats to President Kennedyin the Dallas area (the Dallas-related fileswere disclosed to the Warren Commission).The FPCC and Dallas-related files apparentlyw e re destroyed, and the Review Boardsought any information re g a rding thedestruction. As of this writing, the Servicewas unable to provide any specific informa-tion regarding the disposition of these files.

The Secret Service submitted its Final Decla-ration of Compliance dated September 18,1998, but did not execute it under oath. TheReview Board asked the Service to re-submitits Final Declaration.

4. National Security Agency

Despite the highly classified nature of its oper-ations, the National Security Agency (NSA)conducted searches for assassination re c o rd s .In March 1993, NSA’s Deputy Director ofPlans, Policy, and Programs (DDP) dire c t e d

149

that an NSA-wide search be conducted forre c o rds responsive to the JFK Act. Wi t h i nNSA, the Office of Policy coordinated re v i e wof NSA’s assassination-related re c o rd s .A c c o rding to NSA, “[a] search of all files anddatabases believed to hold such [assassina-t i o n - related] re c o rds was conducted by eachof the Directorates within NSA....” In additionto database searches, NSA assigned ten indi-viduals to hand-search approximately 200boxes of archived material from the 1963–64time frame. The Directorate of Operations andthe NSA A rchives also conducted searches inresponse to specific requests of the ReviewB o a rd in 1995. As a result of NSA’s 1993 and1995 searches, NSA identified a total of 269re c o rds to be processed under the JFK Act. In1998, an additional 109 assassination re c o rd sw e re identified by NSA to be processed underthe JFK A c t .

NSA located the bulk of its assassinationrecords in the NSA Legislative Affairs Officeand General Counsel’s Office. These recordsrelated to NSA responses to prior investiga-tional inquiries regarding the assassination.In March 1995, the NSA briefed the ReviewBoard members as to how it conducted itssearches for assassination records and, inaddition, submitted answers to specific ques-tions of the Review Board concerning assas-sination records in the possession of NSA.The Review Board subsequently submittedadditional questions to NSA, particularlyregarding NSA intelligence records relatingto Cuba or the Soviet Union. NSA answeredthe Board’s questions, submitting a detailedset of responses to Review Board inquiriesregarding intelligence holdings on Cuba andthe Soviet Union that might lead to relevantinformation relating to the assassination.NSA stated that “both Cuba and the USSRwere targets of high interest [to NSA] duringthe time of the assassination,” and that NSAsearched its files relating to those countries.NSA concluded that “[t]hese searches pro-duced records that primarily reflected reac-tions to the assassination.”

With respect to NSA’s review of its intelli-gence holdings, NSA “certifie[d] that it hasneither located, nor is it withholding, anyintelligence records containing informationof investigatory significance to the Kennedyassassination.” NSA advised the ReviewBoard that its relevant intelligence records

had “report[ed] on reactions to the assassina-tion” and that they did not contain “uniqueinformation” on the “planning , execution, orinvestigation” of the assassination.The National Security Agency submitted itsFinal Declaration of Compliance datedAugust 18, 1998.

5. Department of State

The Department of State transferred its mainrecord holdings regarding the assassinationto NARA in 1989. These were “lot files” con-sisting mostly of re c o rds re g a rding theDepartment of State’s work relating to theWarren Commission investigation. The filesoriginated in the Department of State LegalAdvisor’s Office and the Office of Securityand Consular Affairs. After Congress passedthe JFK Act, the Department of State openedthese files to the public in August 1993.

The Department of State designated its Officeof Freedom of Information, Privacy & Classi-fication Review (within the Bureau ofAdministration) as the entity responsible foridentifying and processing assassinationrecords under the JFK Act. The office in turnappointed a retired Department of State his-torian to coordinate the Department’s JFKAct compliance.

The Department of State staff conductednumerous searches of its records to ensurecompliance with the JFK Act. For example, in1993, the Department searched its CentralForeign Policy records. The search included areview of manifests of retired files of Depart-mental offices and foreign posts, as well ascomputerized searches of its automated doc-ument systems. Also in 1993, the AssistantS e c retary of State for Administration for-mally requested various offices within theDepartment to search for records relating tothe assassination.

Among the records located by the Depart-ment were 25,000 pages of material relatingto condolences, funeral attendance arrange-ments, and memorial activities. Also, “virtu-ally every diplomatic conversation held dur-ing the month or so after the assassinationcontained oral condolences or references tothe recent American tragedy.” After process-ing approximately 3,000 such records for theJFK Collection, the Department discontinued

150

p rocessing these kinds of re c o rds and“restricted its search to documents relevantto the murder investigation.” The ReviewBoard did not object to this approach.

Former Foreign Service Officers, working asre-employed annuitants, reviewed Depart-ment of State-originated documents anddocuments re f e r red by other agencies toState. Other entities within the Departmentof State also participated in review anddeclassification, including the Bureau ofDiplomatic Security, the Office of PassportP o l i c y, and the Bureau of Intelligence &R e s e a rch. Department of State re v i e w e r sw e re sent to NARA, the CIA, the House andSenate Intelligence Committees, and the JFKLibrary to review and declassify Departmentof State re c o rds. More than 10,000 suchre c o rds were processed under the JFK Act. Inaddition, Department of State re v i e w e r sp rocessed approximately 4,500 documentsre f e r red to State from other agencies.

Since 1997, a team of Department of Statereviewers also has been declassifyingDepartment records pursuant to ExecutiveO rder 12958. These reviewers werei n s t ructed to identify any assassination-related materials in the course of theirre v i e w. Many of the re c o rds that weres e a rched under the JFK Act have beenprocessed under Executive Order 12958 andsent to NARA. In view of the Department ofState’s representations regarding its declassi-fication efforts under the Executive Order,the Review Board determined that a furtherdetailed review of these records for assassi-nation-related materials was not necessary.

Among the re c o rds identified under the JFKAct and transferred to NARA w e re: diplo-matic cables re g a rding foreign reaction to theassassination; re c o rds from the Mexico CityPost File; documents from the re c o rds ofLlewellyn E. Thompson, former A m b a s s a d o rto the Soviet Union; re c o rds of Secretary DeanRusk, including memoranda summarizingtelephone conversations he had re g a rding theassassination; and working files on the assas-sination maintained by U. Alexis Johnson,then Deputy Undersecretary of State.

The Department of State submitted its FinalDeclaration of Compliance dated March 18,1998.

6. Department of Justice

The Review Board worked separately witheach of the relevant divisions of the Depart-ment of Justice to identify and release recordsunder the JFK Act. Accordingly, the ReviewBoard worked with the Office of Information& Privacy (OIP), responsible for “leadershipo ffices,” the Criminal Division, the CivilDivision, the Civil Rights Division, and theOffice of Legal Counsel. The work of eachDivision is summarized below.

a. Office of Information and Privacy.

This office is responsible for re c o rds of the“leadership offices” of the Department of Jus-tice, including re c o rds of the Attorney Gen-eral, Deputy Attorney General, and A s s o c i a t eAttorney General. In addition, OIP is re s p o n-sible for handling FOIA requests and appealsd i rected against all entities within the Depart-ment of Justice. OIP assigned staff to carry outits obligations under the JFK Act, including asenior counsel, a Department of Justicea rchivist, and two FOIA/declassification spe-cialists. The senior counsel was appointed asthe OIP re p resentative to coordinate OIP’se fforts under the JFK A c t .

After passage of the JFK Act, OIP had identi-fied materials relating to FOIAlitigation overrecords relating to the JFK assassination, andthese materials were placed in the JFK Col-lection. OIP also located and designated asassassination records the following: (1) cer-tain files of Robert Keuch, who was DOJ’sliaison to the HSCA; (2) a file of AttorneyGeneral Edward Levi (entitled, “FBI/JFKAssassination Investigation”); (3) a file ofAttorney General William Barr; (4) files fromDOJ’s Office of Public Affairs; (5) documentsfrom DOJ’s Departmental Review Commit-tee involving administrative appeals of FOIArequests; and (6) a historical file containingassassination-related documents from “lead-ership offices” and those that have been thesubject of past FOIA litigation.

The Office of Information and Privacy sub-mitted its Final Declaration of Compliancedated August 6, 1998.

b. Criminal Division.

After passage of the JFK Act, the Acting A s s i s-tant Attorney General for the Criminal Divi-

151

sion instructed high-level officials within theDivision to forward any assassination re c o rd sto the Freedom of Information/Privacy A c t( F O I / PA)Unit within the Division. In addi-tion, re c o rd searches were conducted by theF O I A / PA Unit and the Criminal DivisionR e c o rds Unit. Files relating to the assassina-tion were identified and placed into the JFKCollection in 1993. Among the Criminal Divi-sion files in the JFK Collection are the Divi-sion’s main file on the assassination and a fileon FBI handling of the assassination investi-gation. In the course of complying with theJFK Act, the Criminal Division utilized fourattorneys and support personnel.

In complying with Review Board requests, theCriminal Divison made available for ReviewB o a rd inspection numerous original files re l a t-ing to organized crime and internal securitymatters. As of September 1998, major cate-gories of assassination re c o rds in the custodyof the Criminal Division had not yet beent r a n s f e r red to the JFK Collection at NARA.These consisted of the re c o rds identified bythe Board from its review of the org a n i z e dcrime and internal security files. The ReviewB o a rd is disappointed that these re c o rds havenot been processed and transferred to the JFKCollection, but the Criminal Division has com-mitted to completing the process of re l e a s i n gthese re c o rds to the JFK Collection.

The Criminal Division has also generatedadditional records regarding recent ballisticstesting of one of the bullet fragments and hascommitted to placing those records in the JFKCollection.

The Criminal Division submitted its FinalDeclaration of Compliance dated September2, 1998.

c. Civil Division.

In March 1993, the Acting Assistant A t t o r n e yGeneral for the Civil Division directed all Divi-sion offices to identify any assassination-related re c o rds that might be in their custody.In addition, the Civil Division appointed theDivision’s attorney in charge of its FOI/PAUnit to coordinate release of assassinationre c o rds under the JFK A c t .

As a result of the search directive, the CivilDivision identified four categories of records

as potentially responsive to the JFK Act: (1)case files relating to FOIA litigation in whichplaintiffs sought access to U.S. governmentrecords on the Kennedy assassination; (2) acase file relating to compensation for the U.S.government’s taking of the Oswald rifle(Marina Oswald Porter v. United States) (thisfile, however, had been destroyed in 1991according to the Department’s records reten-tion/destruction schedule); (3) a CriminalDivision file relating to the Kennedy family’sagreement to donate certain personal itemsof President Kennedy to NARA; and (4) mis-cellaneous materials relating to the assassina-tion located with the Director of the FederalPrograms Branch.

In 1993, the Civil Division transferred toNARAthe small collection of documents thathad been discovered among the secured filesof the Director for the Federal Pro g r a m sBranch. This collection of materials includedpictures of the President’s clothing after theassassination, documents relating to thea u t o p s y, and memoranda relating to theavailability of Warren Commission materials.Aside from these materials, no other assassi-nation-related records had been placed in theJFK Collection at that time.

The Civil Division defends federal agencies insuits arising under the FOIA, and the Divisionhad numerous FOIA litigation cases bro u g h tagainst the government for denying access toKennedy assassination re c o rds. The ReviewB o a rd requested that the Civil Divisionp rocess its FOIA litigation case files relating toassassination re c o rds under the JFK Act. TheCivil Division took the position that FOIA l i t i-gation files on JFK assassination re c o rds neednot be reviewed or released under the JFK A c t .H o w e v e r, the Review Board prevailed uponthe Civil Division to release these FOIA f i l e sunder the JFK Act. The various JFK-re l a t e dF O I A cases were identified to the Civil Divi-sion by the Review Board, and they weretransmitted to the JFK Collection.

The Civil Division submitted its Final Decla-ration of Compliance dated July 29, 1998.

d. Civil Rights Division .

The Civil Rights Division located one fileresponsive to the JFK Act. This file consistedof a civil rights complaint made against New

152

Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison, andit is in the JFK Collection.

The Civil Rights Division submitted its FinalDeclaration of Compliance dated July 2, 1997.

e. Office of Legal Counsel.

The Office of Legal Counsel collected docu-ments spanning from the date of the assassi-nation through the Congressional inquiriesof the 1970s pertaining to legal aspects of theassassination, the start-up of the Wa r re nCommission, access to Warren Commissionevidence, legislation making Pre s i d e n t i a lassassination a federal crime, and publicinquiries about the assassination. Theserecords have been transmitted to the JFK Col-lection.

The Review Board did not request a declara-tion of compliance from the Office of LegalCounsel.

7. Department of the Treasury

The Review Board worked with various com-ponents of the Department of Tre a s u r y,including Main Treasury (i.e., the Office ofthe Secretary), Secret Service (discussedabove), the Internal Revenue Service (IRS),the Customs Service, and the Bureau of Alco-hol, Tobacco & Firearms (ATF).

a. Main Treasury.

In December 1992, the Assistant Director forPolicy, Plans and Paperwork Managementrequested the Departmental Offices RecordsOfficer to identify any assassination-relatedrecords under the JFK Act. No assassinationrecords were identified at that time. In 1995,the Review Board began to make specificadditional requests for information andre c o rds, and Treasury searched for therecords that the Board requested. In addition,Treasury made available original records forReview Board inspection.

In late 1996, Main Treasury designated theDepartmental Offices Records Officer to coor-dinate Treasury’s work under the JFK Act. Inaddition, a senior attorney from the Office ofGeneral Counsel was tasked to handle JFK A c tmatters. These officials assisted in the pro c e s s-ing of identified assassination re c o rds and in

making available to the Review Board addi-tional re c o rds for inspection.Treasury has con-firmed that all of its identified assassinationrecords have been transferred to the JFK Col-lection at NARA.

The Department of the Treasury submittedits Final Declaration of Compliance datedAugust 12, 1998.

b. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms(ATF).

In 1992, ATF’s AssistantD i rector (Administra-tion) directed each of theheads of offices withinATF to locate any recordsrelating to the assassina-tion. No assassinationrecords were identified atthat time. In addition, in1995, ATF re v i e w e dinventories of re c o rd sheld in storage, and noassassination re c o rd swere identified throughthat review. In particular,ATF reported that theFort Worth Records Cen-ter held no ATF recordsfrom the 1960s. ATF alsomade search

The Review Board sought to have ATF locateany 1963–64 re c o rds relating to ATF’s assis-tance in the investigation of the JFK assassina-tion, as well as re c o rds from the late 1970srelating to ATF’s work for the HSCA. TheReview Board specifically requested that AT Fcheck for re c o rds from the ATF Field Office inDallas, as well as re c o rds for the ATF Dire c t o rand ATF Chief Counsel, and this was done.

ATF was fully cooperative and documentedits search efforts in detail and under oath.ATF located only a handful of records, all ofwhich related to its work with the HSCA.

One factor that may explain the inability ofATF to locate any relevant records from the1960s was the fact that ATF was not createdas an independent entity until 1972. ATF’spredecessor agency was the Alcohol TobaccoTax Unit of the Internal Revenue Service. TheReview Board therefore requested that IRS

153

[T]he Department of the Trea-sury supports the purposeunderlying this Joint Resolutionand agrees with its intention ofmaking the greatest number ofgovernment documents avail-able to the public. Perhaps theseadditional disclosures, and theunfettered review by the publicof the documents, will helprelieve the lingering concernsand anxieties surrounding thistragedy, and restore the confi-dence of the American peoplethat there are no more mysteriesassociated with the tragedy.—Department of Treasury,Senate Hearings on JFK Act

determine whether it had any pre-1972 ATFrecords relating to the assassination. IRS wasunable to locate any ATF assassinationrecords within its files.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearmssubmitted its Final Declaration of Compli-ance dated November 11, 1997.

c. Customs Service.

After passage of the JFK Act, Customs con-ducted a search of its Washington, D.C. head-quarters files through computerizedsearches, as well as extensive review of itsarchival files with the assistance of ReviewBoard staff. In addition, Customs instructedits field offices to search for assassinationrecords. Customs identified a modest num-ber of assassination records.

The Review Board staff requested additionalsearches of Customs headquarters records,but no additional records were identified. Inan effort to determine whether field officeskept records that headquarters might havedestroyed, the Review Board asked that Cus-toms have its Dallas field office re-check forany relevant files.

Customs Service submitted its Final Declara-tion of Compliance dated June 30, 1997.

d. Internal Revenue Service.

The identification andrelease of assassination-related re c o rds in IRS’scustody has been diff i c u l tbecause Section 11(a) ofthe JFK Act explicitly pro-vides that tax-relatedrecords continue to beexempt from public dis-c l o s u re under Section 6103of the IRS Code. The

Review Board believes that significant assassi-n a t i o n - related re c o rds of the IRS were pre-cluded from release under the JFK Act. Mosts i g n i f i c a n t l y, the JFK Act failed to secure IRS’spublic release of the original Lee HarveyOswald tax returns and significant tax-re l a t e dmaterial in the files of the Wa r ren Commission.5

Notwithstanding Section 6103, the ReviewB o a rd requested that the IRS collect and

identify all records it had relating to theassassination. In 1994, IRS reported that ithad identified, pursuant to the JFK A c t ,approximately fifty documents. These docu-ments apparently related to a tax proceedinginvolving Jack Ruby’s estate. At the time, nofurther work was undertaken by IRS torelease these documents or to identify anyother records under the JFK Act.

In late 1996, the Review Board sought toclarify what IRS did to locate additionalre c o rds relating to the assassination andwhat it intended to release in light of Sec-tion 6103. In addition, the Review Boardsought to inspect assassination re c o rds thatw e re, or would be, collected by IRS, includ-ing original tax returns of Lee HarveyOswald, and re c o rds relating to IRS workwith the Wa r ren Commission. The ReviewB o a rd also sought to ascertain the statusand anticipated treatment of such re c o rd sby IRS under the JFK Act. While IRS con-s i d e red such re c o rds under Section 6103exempt from release, the Review Boardasserted its legal authority, under the JFKAct, to confidentially inspect IRS assassina-tion re c o rds. However, the assassinationre c o rds collected by the IRS were not madeavailable for the Review Board’s inspection.Only a year later did IRS affirm the ReviewB o a rd’s legal authority to inspect IRS assas-sination re c o rd s .

In 1998, the Review Board requested that IRSformally document its actions and compli-ance under the JFK Act. The Review Boardrequested that the IRS search for records thatmight relate to the assassination and that theIRS specifically identify any such records thatit believed could not be released under Sec-tion 6103. The Review Board also requestedthat IRS review the tax-related records in theWarren Commission and HSCA holdings todetermine which records could be releasedconsistent with Section 6103.

At the request of the Review Board, the IRSintends to forward to the JFK Collection alltax-related assassination records identifiedby IRS, including those records to remainconfidential pursuant to Section 6103. Therecords covered by Section 6103, althoughtransmitted to the JFK Collection, will not bereleased pending any later determination asto their status under the IRS code.

154

[T]he department and the IRShave no objection to lifting thebar to public disclosure of thetax information previously pro-vided to the Warren Commis-sion and the House and SenateCommittees.—Department of Treasury,Senate Hearings on JFK Act

The Review Board has received draft compli-ance statements from the Internal RevenueService but has not received the IRS’s FinalDeclaration of Compliance.

8. National Security Council

The National Security Council did not ini-tially do any work in response to the JFK Actfollowing its passage. In 1997, the ReviewB o a rd contacted the NSC to ascertainwhether it might have any re c o rds thatwould be relevant under the JFK Act. TheNSC was fully cooperative in identifying andmaking available the records within its cus-tody and control. NSC provided the ReviewBoard with various inventories to recordsheld off-site and certain re c o rds from itsvault in the Old Executive Office Building.Review Board staff worked with senior NSCrecords officials to designate assassination-related records under the JFK Act. Amongthe early 1960s records designated were min-utes of NSC and Special Group meetings.The materials covered issues regarding Cubaand Vietnam.

The National Security Council submitted itsFinal Declaration of Compliance dated April30, 1998.

9. The President’s Foreign IntelligenceAdvisory Board

In early 1997, the Review Board re q u e s t e dthat the President’s Foreign IntelligenceAdvisory Board (PFIAB) make available any1962–64 re c o rds that might relate to theKennedy assassination. The PFIAB agreed tomake available certain re c o rds for theReview Board’s inspection. Over severalmonths, the Review Board staff inspectedthese re c o rds and identified certain excerptsas assassination re c o rds. When the ReviewB o a rd sought to have the re c o rds pro c e s s e dfor public release, The PFIAB took the posi-tion that these re c o rds were, in fact, notreleasable under the JFK Act. Senator Wa r re nRudman, Chairman of The PFIAB, appeare db e f o re members of the Review Board inAugust 1998 to present The PFIAB’s viewthat its re c o rds were not covered by the JFKAct and, furthermore, that particular re c o rd sidentified by the Review Board were nota s s a s s i n a t i o n - related within the meaning ofthe statute.

The Review Board proceeded to formally des-ignate the identified The PFIAB re c o rd s(many of which dealt with U.S. policy toward sCuba) as assassination re c o rds under the JFKAct. Challenging the Review Board’s author-ity to designate pertinent re c o rds as assassina-tion re c o rds under the Act, The PFIABrequested a document-by-document justifica-tion re g a rding the relevance of the re c o rds, thepublic interest in their release, and whetherThe PFIAB documents contained uniqueinformation. The Board had previously articu-lated the relevance of the materials to ThePFIAB and considered the requested analysisto be unnecessary, burdensome, and ulti-mately an obstacle to release. At the time ofthis Report, The PFIAB reserved its right toappeal to the President any Board decision torelease The PFIAB re c o rd s .

10. Immigration & Naturalization Service

In 1993, the Immigration & NaturalizationService (INS) conducted a re c o rds search inresponse to passage of the JFK Act. Specifi-c a l l y, INS’s Assistant Commissioner for theR e c o rds System Division directed all INScomponents to search for re c o rds that met thestatutory definition of an assassinationre c o rd. INS designated a Management A n a-lyst for the Headquarters Records Manage-ment Branch to receive and process INSassassination re c o rds under the JFK Act. Mostof the files identified by INS were files on var-ious individuals who had some connection tothe assassination story, and there f o re had pre-viously been made available to Congre s s i o n a lcommittees, including the HSCA. After con-sultation with other agencies, INS identifiedadditional files as being pertinent under theJFK Act. (A list of the INS files pro c e s s e dunder the JFK Act is set forth in the INS FinalDeclaration of Compliance.) While INS hadidentified over 65 files to be processed underthe JFK Act, none had been transferred toN A R A until late 1996. INS ultimately devotedsubstantial re s o u rces to processing these filesfor release under the JFK A c t .

INS had not, at the time of this Report, com-pleted the transmission of its identifiedassassination records to the JFK Collection.Although INS had forwarded numerous filesto the JFK Collection, including files on Leeand Marina Oswald, INS had yet to forward

155

files on certain lesser-known figures, somemiscellaneous documents from its subjectfiles, and a work file on Carlos Marcello. INSattributes the delay, in part, to the time-con-suming processing of referring documents toother agencies for review and awaiting agen-cies’ release of their equities. INS has com-mitted to completing the transmission of allremaining assassination-related files to theJFK Collection.

The Immigration and Naturalization Servicesubmitted its Final Declaration of Compli-ance dated September 11, 1998.

11. Office of the Secretary of Defense

The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD)had not identified any assassination recordsby August 1993, the first deadline imposedby the JFK Act. In October 1995, ReviewBoard staff met with various Department ofDefense officials and identified topics andrecord categories to be searched for under theJFK Act. As a result, components of thearmed forces under the Secretary of Defensewere instructed to search for assassinationrecords and, in addition, OSD’s own archivalre c o rds were searched. Miscellaneousrecords were thereafter identified from theSecretary of Defense official correspondencefiles, including records on Cuba and corre-spondence with the HSCA.

The OSD’s Directorate for Correspondence &D i rectives was diligent in attempting toaddress the record-related issues raised bythe Review Board. The OSD’s Records Sec-tion ran computerized record searches andinventoried its archive re c o rds and ulti-mately responded to all Review Boardsearches.

The Office of the Secretary of Defense sub-mitted its Final Declaration of Compliancedated May 21, 1998.

12. Defense Intelligence Agency

In 1993, DIA forwarded to NARA approxi-mately one box of materials for the JFK Col-lection consisting mostly of correspondencewith the HSCA. The Review Board staff metwith DIA in early 1997 and determined thatDIA had not reviewed all of its relevantarchive holdings. The Review Board then

began to make specific requests for addi-tional information from DIA. All requestswere ultimately answered.

In an effort to locate records responsive to theReview Board’s additional requests, a specialDIA task force worked at the WashingtonNational Records Center in Suitland, Mary-land, conducting a page-by-page review ofall pertinent pre-1965 Agency file series.After this review of its archive records, DIAidentified additional assassination-re l a t e ddocuments. These records have been placedin the JFK Collection.

The Defense Intelligence Agency submittedits Final Declaration of Compliance datedApril 10, 1998.

13. Department of the Army

In response to the JFK Act, the Army con-ducted in 1993 an “Army-wide canvassingfor relevant records.” Another canvassing ofrecords was done in 1997. The Army reportedthat it conducted “a complete review of the70,000 line item listing of the Army’s hold-ings in the Federal Records Centers... . ” TheArmy identified various assassinationrecords, including: (a) material relating toballistics research performed by the Army inconnection with the assassination; (b) the1965 typewritten notes of Pierre Finck, theArmy pathologist who participated in theKennedy autopsy; (c) records of the ArmyCorps of Engineers relating to the design andconstruction of the Kennedy gravesite; (d)materials relating to the polygraph examina-tion of Jack Ruby from the Defense Poly-graph Institute at Fort McClellan, Alabama;(e) records on Cuba from the files of JosephCalifano, created while he was a SpecialAssistant to the Secretary of the Army in theKennedy administration; and (f) Army intel-ligence files on various individuals con-nected with the Kennedy assassination story.In addition, the Army made available micro-film records of the Pentagon Telecommunica-tions Agency, and the Review Board desig-nated certain documents from the 1963–64period as assassination records.

The Department of the Army submitted itsFinal Declaration of Compliance dated Sep-tember 11, 1998.

156

a. Investigative Records Repository .

The Review Board staff also worked sepa-rately with the IRR at Fort Meade, theArmy’s storage facility for counter-intelli-gence files. The IRR has released severalintelligence files under the JFK Act, includingfiles on Gerald P. Hemming and anti-Castroactivists. The IRR was cooperative in deter-mining whether it had any files on other indi-viduals related to the assassination. In manycases, they found no records for the namessubmitted. The Review Board requested theIRR to determine whether it had any office orwork files for certain Army intelligence offi-cials located in the Dallas area in 1963–64.The IRR stated that it had no such files. Inaddition, the Review Board requested thatthe IRR provide any additional informationor documentation with respect to an Armyintelligence dossier maintained on Oswald.The Army destroyed this file in 1973 as partof a program to purge domestic surveillancefiles. The Review Board developed no newinformation on the file or its destructionbeyond that developed by the HSCA.

The Review Board received the Final Decla-ration of Compliance of the InvestigativeRecords Repository on January 23, 1998.

14. Department of the Navy

The Review Board considered records of theDepartment of the Navy essential in view ofLee Harvey Oswald’s tenure with theMarines, which is administratively a part ofNavy. Under the JFK Act, the Navy identifiedand placed into the JFK Collection at NARAcertain core files relating to Lee HarveyOswald—(1) the personnel and medicalMarine Corps files for Oswald and (2) Officeof Naval Intelligence records on Oswald.

After passage of the JFK Act, the Navy’sCriminal Investigative Service transferred, in1994, the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI)records that had been maintained on LeeHarvey Oswald.6 In 1995, the General Coun-sel of the Navy directed that a further reviewof the Navy’s files be undertaken pursuant tothe JFK Act. This directive went to the Chiefof Naval Operations, the Commandant of theMarine Corps, the Naval Criminal Investiga-tive Service, and the Naval Historical Center.The Navy identified no additional assassina-

tion records. In 1996, the Marine Corps trans-mitted to the Review Board the original per-sonnel and medical Marine Corps files onOswald. The Review Board transmitted theserecords to the JFK Collection.

Notwithstanding the Navy’s identification ofthese core materials, the Review Boardrequested the Navy to search additionalre c o rd categories to ensure that all re l e v a n tmaterials had been identified. In December1996, the Navy designated two officials withinthe Office of General Counsel to coord i n a t ethe Navy’s further search and processing ofa s s a s s i n a t i o n - related re c o rds under the JFKAct. In early 1997, after the Navy consultedwith Review Board staff re g a rding categoriesof potentially relevant re c o rds, the GeneralCounsel’s office issued another search dire c-tive to the Chief of Naval Operations, theCommandant of the Marine Corps, the JudgeAdvocate General of the Navy, the NavalCriminal Investigative Service, the Secre t a r yof the Navy’s Administrative Division, andother components within the Navy. TheReview Board asked the Navy to search forfiles of high-level officials of the MarineCorps, the Office of Naval Intelligence, andthe Navy during the years 1959 through 1964.The Navy conducted an extensive review offiles, including a review of files from the Sec-retary of the Navy’s Administrative Office, theChief of Naval Operations, and the MarineCorps. The Navy located miscellaneous docu-ments relating to the Wa r ren Commission andH S C A f rom files of the Administrative Off i c efor the Secretary of the Navy as a result of thiss e a rch. Among the re c o rds found was anunsigned copy of an affidavit by the Dire c t o rof ONI, pre p a red at the time of the Wa r re nCommission, stating that Lee Harvey Oswaldwas not used as an agent or informant byONI. The Navy confirmed that it had not,h o w e v e r, located the 1959–1964 files for theD i rector of ONI.

The Department of the Navy submitted itsFinal Declaration of Compliance datedDecember 3, 1997.

a. Office of Naval Intelligence.

The Review Board pursued the matter of ONIre c o rds separately. A c c o rd i n g l y, the Boardrequested that ONI submit its own certifica-tion of its compliance with the JFK A c t . In its

157

Final Declaration of Compliance, ONI statedthat it conducted an extensive review of ONIre c o rds held at Federal Records Centerst h roughout the country. ONI did not identifyany additional assassination re c o rds. ONI wasunable to find any relevant files for the Dire c-tor of ONI from 1959 to 1964. ONI alsoacknowledged that there were additional ONIre c o rds that were not reviewed for assassina-tion re c o rds, but that these re c o rds would bereviewed under Executive Order 12958 re q u i r-ing declassification of government re c o rd s .

The Office of Naval Intelligence submitted itsFinal Declaration of Compliance dated May18, 1998.

b. National Naval Medical Center at Bethesda.

The Review Board also pursued assassinationre c o rds with the National Naval Medical Cen-ter at Bethesda, Maryland (NNMC). TheNNMC was cooperative and conductedextensive searches. An unsigned original ofthe JFK autopsy report was located in a safe atthe NNMC’s Anatomic Pathology Division.The NNMC located miscellaneous FOIArequests relating to autopsy re c o rds. TheReview Board asked the NNMC to re - c h e c kwhether it had any 1963–64 files for the topo fficials of the NNMC, including Comman-ders Humes and Boswell. Humes and Boswellw e re the Navy pathologists who conductedthe autopsy of President Kennedy. TheNNMC re-certified that it had no such files.

The National Naval Medical Center submit-ted its Final Declaration of Compliance datedJune 27, 1997, and its Supplemental Declara-tion of Compliance on December 23, 1997.

15. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology

The Review Board worked directly with theArmed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP).A F I P designated its A rchivist for the NationalMuseum of Health and Medicine to serve asthe official responsible for conducting A F I P ’ ss e a rches under the JFK Act. As with theNational Naval Medical Center in Bethesda,Maryland, the Review Board sought to identifyany re c o rds from A F I P that might relate to theautopsy of President Kennedy (Lt. Col. PierreFinck, one of the autopsy pathologists, wasChief of the Wound Ballistics Branch of A F I Pa tthe time). A F I P located some materials of Dr.

Finck, including two 1965 reports he pre p a re dfor General Blumberg re g a rding the Kennedyautopsy and his 1969 memorandum re g a rd i n gtestimony he gave at the Clay Shaw trial. TheReview Board also asked A F I P for any 1963–64files of top A F I P o fficials who might have hadinformation re g a rding the autopsy of Pre s i d e n tKennedy. AFIP did locate one additionalre c o rd, an oral history interview with Dr.Robert F. Karnei, Jr., in which he briefly dis-cusses his role at the JFK autopsy.

The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology sub-mitted its Final Declaration of Compliancedated June 12, 1997.

16. Department of the Air Force

In 1995, the Air Force directed certain A i rF o rce commands to undertake searches forassassination re c o rds. The only assassinationre c o rd found was an operations logbookf rom A n d rews Air Force Base that hadre c o rded events at the base on the day of theassassination. The Review Board asked theAir Force to conduct further searches forassassination re c o rds. The Review Boardasked the Air Force to: (1) identify andreview the 1963–64 files for the highest off i-cials in the Air Force, including the Secre t a r yof the Air Force and the Chief of Staff for theAir Force; (2) more thoroughly review thefiles of the Office of Special Investigationsfor any re c o rds related to Oswald; and (3)determine whether there were any re c o rd srelating to Air Force One on November 22,1963, including specifically searching for anyaudiotapes of transmissions to or from A i rF o rce One on the day of the assassination.

As the Review Board requested, the A i rF o rce conducted a targeted search. The A i rF o rce did not, however, forward additionalre c o rds to the JFK Collection. After the A i rF o rce submitted its Final Declaration, theB o a rd requested that the Air Force furtheraccount for specific Air Force re c o rds, partic-ularly re c o rds for the Air Force’s Office ofP residential Pilot and the HistoricalR e s e a rch Agency at Maxwell Air Force Basein Alabama. The Air Force, at the time of thisReport, had not followed up on the ReviewB o a rd’s re q u e s t .

The Air Force submitted its Final Declarationof Compliance dated November 21, 1997.

158

17. Joint Staf f

The Chief of the Information ManagementDivision, Joint Secretariat, Joint Staff, coordi-nated the Joint Staff’s compliance with theJFK Act. The Joint Staff searched its archivedfiles for records of the Joint Chiefs of Stafffrom the early 1960s, including files of JointChiefs Chairmen Lyman L. Lemnitzer,Maxwell Taylor, and Earle G. Wheeler. TheJoint Staff estimated that it spent 210 hourssearching for assassination records in suchfiles. The Joint Staff allowed the ReviewBoard access to these records.

The Joint Staff responded to the ReviewBoard’s requests for additional informationrelating to Cuba and Vietnam.

In the course of identifying relevant records,the Review Board learned that the Joint Staffhad destroyed minutes and/or transcripts ofmeetings of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1947to 1978. Since the re c o rds would haveincluded minutes of meetings in 1963 and1964 which might have been relevant to theassassination, the Review Board requestedthat the Joint Staff account for the destruc-tion. The Joint Staff explained that, in 1974,the Secretary for the Joint Chiefs of Staffordered these materials destroyed and, atthat time, also established a dispositionschedule for such records. In 1978, accordingto the Joint Staff, the “practice of recordingmeeting minutes was discontinued.. . . ”

The Joint Staff submitted its Final Declarationof Compliance dated November 13, 1997.

18. White House CommunicationsAgency

The White House Communications Agency(WHCA) did not identify any assassinationre c o rds before its first meeting with theReview Board in early 1997. The ReviewB o a rd contacted WHCA to determinewhether it retained any archived re c o rd sfrom 1963–64 relating to the assassination.

The Review Board formally requested thatWHCA search for any 1963–64 records thatmight have pertained to the assassination.WHCA located and placed into the JFK Col-lection an historical file that contained state-ments of WHCA personnel regarding events

on the day of the assassination and, in addi-tion, a WHCA memorandum providing a“list of telephone calls recorded by the WhiteHouse switchboard on 22 November 1963.”

The Review Board further re q u e s t e dW H C A to undertake a broad search for anyre c o rds reflecting White House communi-cations re g a rding the assassination, includ-ing any communications to or from A i rF o rce One on the day of the assassination.The Commander of WHCA i n s t ructed hiso ffices to conduct a search for assassina-t i o n - related re c o rds. WHCA located noadditional assassination re c o rds. TheReview Board then requested that WHCAc e r t i f y, under penalty of perjury, that it hadno other re c o rds from the 1963–64 periodthat might relate to the assassination.W H C A certified that it had no re c o rds fro mthe 1963–64 time period nor any re c o rd srelating to their disposition.

The White House Communications Agencysubmitted its Final Declaration of Compli-ance dated April 22, 1998.

19. U.S. Postal Service

In 1993, the Postal Service located its originalfile on the Kennedy assassination investiga-tion composed of Postal Service investiga-tive reports re g a rding the assassination. Thefile had been located among the arc h i v e dre c o rds for the Chief Postal Inspector, andthe file was subsequently transferred to theJFK Collection. The Review Board suggestedadditional searches. The Postal Service wasdiligent in following those suggestions, butno additional assassination re c o rds wereu n c o v e re d .

20. Social Security Administration

In response to a directive in 1993 by theDepartment of Health & Human Services(HHS) regarding compliance with the JFKAct, the Social Security Administration (SSA)inventoried its holdings relating to Lee Har-vey Oswald and Jack Ruby. SSA sequesteredthe records at the Review Board’s request.These same SSA records were later acquiredby IRS and IRS deposited them in the JFKCollection, but Section 6103 of the InternalRevenue Code prevents disclosure of taxreturn records.

159

In early 1997, the Review Board staff metwith SSA to verify what assassination-related re c o rds SSA might have and todetermine if any such re c o rds could be pub-licly released. The Review Board re q u e s t e dthat SSA assemble all earnings-re l a t e dre c o rds for Lee Harvey Oswald and JackR u b y, quarterly reports filed by Oswald’semployers (to verify Oswald’s employmenthistory and income), and the original fileopened for Marina Oswald’s claim for sur-vivor benefits following Lee HarveyOswald’s death.

The SSA was extremely diligent in collectingand assembling these re c o rds. The SSA p ro-tected some of these re c o rds under Section6103, but the balance were transmitted tothe JFK Collection. SSA placed its assassina-tion re c o rds that contain information pro-tected by Section 6103 in the JFK collectionw h e re they will be kept confidential byNARA. The SSA confirmed that thesere c o rds are being pre s e r v e d .

As with Oswald’s tax returns, the ReviewBoard regrets that Oswald’s earnings infor-mation and employment history, as con-tained in employer reports on file with SSA,have not been released to the public as of thedate of this Report.

21. Drug Enforcement Administration

The Drug Enforcement A d m i n i s t r a t i o n(DEA) was cooperative with the ReviewBoard in making files available for review. InMay 1998, the Review Board asked DEA toformally process certain records as assassina-tion records under the JFK Act. In addition,the Review Board asked for a formal state-ment of DEA’s compliance. However, DEAhas taken no steps to formally designateassassination records, nor has it submitted acompliance report as requested.

22. NARA and the Presidential Libraries

The Review Board worked separately withN A R A in Washington, D.C., the FederalRecords Center in Fort Worth, Texas, the FordP residential Library, the JFK Pre s i d e n t i a lLibrary, and the LBJ Presidential Library. Thecompliance status for each of these entities isset forth below.

a. NARA, Washington, D.C.

NARA has legal and physical custody ofnumerous federal government records thata re transferred to it by federal agencies.Accordingly, the JFK Act required NARA toidentify any assassination records that mayhave been in its legal custody at the time theJFK Act was passed.

After the JFK Act was passed, NARA identi-fied three major record categories in its cus-tody: (1) records of the Warren Commission;(2) the main Department of Justice CriminalDivision file on the Kennedy assassination;and (3) the main Secret Service file on theassassination. Many of the records withinthese files were already open to the publicwhen the JFK Act was passed. NARA alsoidentified administrative re c o rds for theUnited States Archivist and Deputy Archivistrelating to the handling of assassination-related materials maintained by NARA,including administrative records regardingWarren Commission holdings. In addition,NARA staff identified various federal agen-cies that had cooperated with the WarrenCommission and searched those records forassassination records.

In December 1992, the Assistant Archivistissued a directive to the staff of NARArequesting that any other assassination-related records be identified. Some miscella-neous records were included in the JFK Col-lection as a result of this search. In addition,NARA—through its Center for LegislativeArchives—processed hundreds of boxes ofCongressional records relating to the assassi-nation, including most importantly therecords of the House Select Committee onAssassinations (HSCA).

In April 1998, staffs of the Review Board andNARA met to review the status of NARA’sidentification and release of assassinationrecords. The Review Board asked NARA toconfirm that there were no other closedre c o rds relating to the assassination thatmight be among classified or closed files ofofficials of the Kennedy and Johnson Admin-istrations, including certain cabinet secre-taries. In addition, the Review Board hadasked NARA to coordinate with the Admin-istrative Office of U.S. Courts to identify andsecure for the JFK Collection court case files

160

for various FOIA suits involving the public’srequest to open up CIA, FBI, and otheragency files on the Kennedy assassination.NARA has been working with the Adminis-trative Office to obtain these court files.

N A R A submitted its Final Declaration ofCompliance on September 14, 1998.

b. NARA, Southwest Region.

NARA had its Southwest regional facilityundertake searches pursuant to the JFK Act.That facility is a repository for federal agencyrecords in the Dallas, Texas area. Among therecords identified under the JFK Act by theSouthwest Region were: (1) court files fromthe federal district court in Dallas, Texas withrespect to litigation over the rifle used toassassinate President Kennedy (United Statesv. 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano Rifle and MarinaOswald Porter v. United States); (2) court filesfor the litigation brought by Claw Shawagainst Jim Garrison in federal district courtin New Orleans (Clay Shaw v. Jim Garrison);(3) files from the U.S Attorney in Dallas relat-ing to the litigation over the Oswald rifle;and (4) records of the criminal proceedingsagainst Jack Ruby, also obtained from theU.S. Attorney in Dallas.

The Southwest Region also identified withinits custody various medical equipment fromTrauma Room No. 1 at Dallas Parkland Hos-pital. This equipment was purchased fromDallas County in 1973 when Parkland Hospi-tal was being remodeled, and the equipmentwas placed in storage by NARA at its South-west Region facility. The Review Boarddeferred to NARA’s decision to retain theequipment in storage.7

In April 1998, Review Board staff met with off i-cials of the Southwest Region at its facility inFort Worth, Texas. The Review Board sought toascertain whether the Southwest Region hadlegal custody of any 1963–64 re c o rds for vari-ous law enforcement, intelligence, or militaryagencies with offices in the Dallas re g i o n ,including Secret Service, AT F, FBI, and ONI.The staff of the Southwest Region confirmedthat it had no such relevant re c o rds.

The Southwest Region of NARA submitted itsFinal Declaration of Compliance dated July10, 1998.

c. The Gerald R. Ford Library.

The Ford Library had substantial holdingsthat were relevant under the JFK Act, includ-ing files of the President’s Commission onCIA Activities within the United States (theRockefeller Commission) and papers of for-mer President Gerald R. Ford relating to hiswork on the Warren Commission. The FordLibrary first identified assassination recordsf rom among materials that were alre a d yopen to researchers, including records fromGerald Ford’s Congressional and Vice-Presi-dential papers and records of Ford Adminis-tration officials.8 As a result of these searches,the Ford Library transmitted approximatelysix cubic feet of records to the JFK Collectionin August 1993. The Ford Library alsosearched its unprocessed or closed “nationalsecurity collections.” This encompassed areview of the Rockefeller Commission files,as well as files of President Ford’s NationalSecurity Advisor and the Presidential Coun-sel to the extent the files related to intelli-gence investigations of the mid-1970s (i.e.,the Rockefeller Commission and Churc hCommittee investigations). The Ford Libraryreviewed approximately 240,000 pages frommore than 20 different closed or unprocessedcollections, and the Library selected approxi-mately 1,400 documents (11,500 pages) forp rocessing under the JFK Act. The FordLibrary worked with the Review Board tohave relevant agencies release these assassi-nation records.

The Ford Library submitted its Final Declara-tion of Compliance dated August 12, 1998.

d. The John F. Kennedy Library.

The identification ofassassination re c o rd swithin the holdings of theJFK Library presented achallenge to both theLibrary and the ReviewB o a rd in view of theextensive material re l a t-ing to, and originated by,o fficials within theKennedy administration.

After passage of the JFK Act, the JFK Librarys t a ff undertook an extensive review ofKennedy administration re c o rds, personal

161

The National Archives andRecords Administration (NA R A )fully supports the acceleratedr e v i e w , d e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , a n drelease of records related tothe assassination of PresidentK e n n e d y .—National Archives andRecords Administration, SenateHearings on JFK Act

papers, and oral histories in its possession. Inp a r t i c u l a r, the JFK Library reviewed itsclosed or “unprocessed” holdings to identifyassassination re c o rds. Among the re c o rd sreviewed by the JFK Library staff were Presi-dent Kennedy’s National Security files andoffice files. The Library staff also reviewedmaterial made available to investigative bod-ies in the 1970s such as the Church Commit-tee. In addition, the Review Board staff, withthe Library, reviewed the classified AttorneyGeneral file series of Robert F. Kennedy. TheJFK Library staff reviewed numerous collec-tions of records from Kennedy administra-tion officials, as well as numerous oral his-tory interviews of such officials. The Libraryprocessed many of these records as assassi-nation records.

As of March 1995, the JFK Library had trans-mitted to the JFK Collection 33,000 pages ofdocuments identified under the JFK A c t .These included papers of President Kennedy,Robert F. Kennedy, C. Douglas Dillon,T h e o d o re Sorenson, Burke Marshall, DavidB ro d e r, Chet Huntley, and Arthur Schlesinger.In addition, re c o rds from the Kennedy WhiteHouse were also transmitted. These includedre c o rds from the National Security files, theWhite House Central Subject files, and theP resident’s Office files. The Library also sentall or parts of numerous oral history inter-views to the extent that these interviewstouched upon the Kennedy assassination.Additional materials were sent later, includ-ing Teddy White’s “Camelot papers,” whichcontained notes of his interview with Jacque-line Kennedy for Life magazine, and EvelynLincoln’s re c o rds consisting of log books,daily diaries, and appointment books forP resident Kennedy. Finally, the JFK Libraryhas stated that all remaining closed Dictabeltsof President Kennedy’s telephone conversa-tions, as well as 25 hours of audio re c o rd i n g sof President Kennedy’s meetings, will bereleased this fall. The JFK Library committedto releasing all remaining audio re c o rdings ofKennedy meetings by 1999 under ExecutiveO rder 12958.

The Review Board attempted to ensure thatthe Library had reviewed and identified allrelevant records in its custody, particularlyrecords that were closed and unavailable toresearchers. The Review Board submitted tothe JFK Library, in July 1998, a detailed set of

questions re g a rding the Library’s re c o rdsearches and its work under the JFK Act. Thequestions were to be answered by Libraryofficials, under penalty of perjury, in theLibrary’s Final Declaration of Compliance.The Library submitted its Final Declarationof Compliance shortly thereafter. The JFKLibrary certified that “[a]ll records of Presi-dent Kennedy, Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis,Evelyn Lincoln, and Robert F. Kennedy in thecustody of the Library have been reviewedunder the JFK Act.” The Library also statedthat further review of Robert F. Kennedy’spapers had resulted in the identification ofadditional assassination records that wouldbe processed for release. In addition, approx-imately 150 RFK documents previously iden-tified for release were still in the process ofdeclassification or review by the RFK DonorCommittee at the time of this Report.9 Whilerecognizing the extensive work of the JFKLibrary and its significant contribution to theJFK Collection, the Review Board was disap-pointed in the delay in identification andrelease of RFK papers.

The JFK Library, at its suggestion, briefed themembers of the Review Board in August1998 with respect to the work of the Libraryunder the JFK Act. At that presentation, theReview Board was given assurances by theLibrary, in the strongest terms, that it wascommitted to completing release of all assas-sination-related records, including the RFKrecords.10

The JFK Library submitted its Final Declara-tion of Compliance dated August 18, 1998.

e. The Lyndon B. Johnson Library.

The LBJ Library has extensive re c o rds thatw e re reviewed pursuant to the JFK Act. TheLibrary holds 505 collections of personalpapers, 59 bodies of federal re c o rds, and 1,227p rocessed and deeded oral history inter-views. Even before the JFK Act was passed in1992, the Library, beginning in 1980, identi-fied and made available materials that it hadrelating to the assassination of Pre s i d e n tK e n n e d y.11 In 1993, the LBJ Library transmit-ted to the JFK Collection material on theassassination from the LBJ White House Cen-tral files, White House Confidential files, andthe National Security files; the Library’s “Spe-cial File on the Assassination of Pre s i d e n t

162

K e n n e d y,” which was assembled by theWhite House in late 1966 as a re f e rence file torespond to William Manchester’s book, T h eDeath of a Pre s i d e n t ; P resident Johnson’s dailydiary re c o rds listing his appointments andphone calls made during the period followingthe assassination; office files of various WhiteHouse aides; White House telephone off i c ere c o rds; personal papers of Under Secre t a r yof State George Ball, Attorney General Ram-sey Clark, and John Connally; and numero u soral history interviews. The LBJ Library alsoreleased tapes of President Johnson’s conver-sations relating to the assassination (datingmostly from 1963, 1964, and 1967—the time ofthe Garrison investigation and publication ofthe Manchester book).

In the Spring of 1997, the Review Board staffconducted a comprehensive review of LBJLibrary National Security Files (NSF), closedoral histories thought to be related to theassassination, and various manuscripts,archives and office files of key officials. Thes t a ff identified more than 300 additionalassassination re c o rds. The Review Boardcoordinated with various agencies in declas-sifying these records.

Finally, the LBJ Library committed to releas-ing tapes of all of President Johnson’sre c o rded telephone conversations thro u g hOctober 1964 by September 1998. This releasewill include six previously closed recordingsof President Johnson’s telephone conversa-tions with Jacqueline Kennedy in December1963 and January 1964. The LBJ Library willalso release additional telephone conversa-tions identified as assassination-re l a t e d ,including two involving McGeorge Bundy.The Library plans to continue release of theLBJ tapes (post-October, 1964) in chronologi-cal order, and has represented that additionalconversations relating to the assassinationwill be forwarded to the JFK Collection.

The LBJ Library submitted its Final Declara-tion of Compliance dated August 27, 1998.

23. General Services Administration

The General Services Administration (GSA)conducted no records searches under the JFKAct. The Review Board asked GSA in 1997 todetermine whether it might have recordsrelating to the assassination. This approach

was made because NARA, until 1984, wasunder the auspices of GSA. Therefore, theReview Board wanted to ensure that GSAdidnot have records relating to NARA’s han-dling of Warren Commission materials or thehandling of the JFK autopsy photos and x-rays. GSA did identify files for the top offi-cials of GSA from the 1960s but these werealready at NARA and fully available to thepublic. GSA did not transfer any records tothe JFK Collection.

GSA submitted its Final Declaration of Com-pliance dated January 26, 1998.

C. CONGRESSIONAL RECORDS

In addition to executive branch records, theReview Board worked with various congres-sional committees, and NARA, to ensure dis-c l o s u re of various congressional re c o rd srelating to the assassination. The most impor-tant record groups in this regard were therecords of the two congressional committeesthat conducted independent investigations ofP resident Kennedy’s assassination—theChurch Committee in 1975–76 and the HouseSelect Committee on Assassinations in1977–79. In addition, the Review Boardsought to ascertain whether there were rele-vant records among certain other Congres-sional Committees.

1. The House Select Committee onAssassinations (the HSCA)

The files of the HSCA embody the collec-tive work of that Committee in investigatingthe assassinations of President Kennedy andthe Reverend Martin Luther King. A f t e rissuance of the HSCA’s report in 1979, thevoluminous files of the HSCA w e re placedin storage and were to be kept under sealuntil 2029 (i . e ., fifty years from 1979).Because these were Congressional re c o rd s ,they were not subject to disclosure underthe FOIA. Oliver Stone’s film, J F K, under-s c o red the existence of these closed files andthe fact that they would not be re l e a s e duntil 2029. After passage of the JFK A c t ,N A R A made the opening of the HSCA f i l e sthe highest priorities. NARA opened the JFKassassination portion of the HSCA re c o rd safter consulating with the agencies that hadequities in the re c o rd s .

163

2. Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations withRespect to Intelligence Activities (the Church Committee)

Records of the Church Committee, like theHSCA records, were of high public interest.The Review Board made extensive efforts toe n s u re the fullest disclosure of re l e v a n trecords. The Church Committee, in 1975–76,investigated a range of issues involving theoperations of the intelligence agencies. Manyof these issues fell outside the scope of theJFK Act, but the Church Committee investi-gated the Kennedy assassination and theissue of assassination of foreign leaders.

After passage of the JFK Act, the SenateSelect Committee on Intelligence (SSCI)inventoried the original re c o rds of theChurch Committee (some 450 boxes) andtransmitted approximately 40 boxes of assas-sination-related records to the JFK Collection.This represented a significant effort by theCommittee, as well as by the agencies thatreviewed and declassified the re c o rd s .NARA, however, surveyed the re c o rd splaced in the Collection and concluded thattestimony directly relevant to the Kennedyassassination (and cited in the Kennedyassassination report of the Church Commit-tee) was not included in the released materi-als. For approximately two years, the SSCIdid not explain or rectify this crucial gap inthe records provided to NARA.

In 1997, the Review Board wrote to the SSCIand, again, raised the issue of identifying andprocessing testimony directly relevant to theC h u rch Committee’s investigation of theKennedy assassination, as well as testimonyre g a rding alleged CIA assassination plotsagainst foreign leaders. The SSCI was coop-erative and diligent in attempting to locateand forward the specific transcripts that hadbeen identified by the Review Board andNARA. Throughout 1997–98, the SSCI identi-fied and produced scores of micro f i l m e dcopies of the requested transcripts. This testi-mony was processed and placed into the JFKCollection. The transcripts include testimonyof FBI and CIA officials who worked on theJFK assassination investigation, as well asofficials who testified regarding the allegedassassination plots against Fidel Castro .Among the officials whose testimony was

released under the JFK Act were Secretary ofDefense Robert McNamara; Deputy Secre-tary of Defense Roswell Gilpatric; SpecialAssistant for National Security McGeorgeBundy; former Directors of Central Intelli-gence John McCone, Richard Helms, andWilliam Colby; Deputy Director of CentralIntelligence Marshall Carter; CIAofficer JohnScelso (alias); Secret Service Chief JamesRowley; Assistant FBI Director Alex Rosen;FBI Special Agent in Charge for the DallasField Office Gordon Shanklin; and FBI AgentJames Hosty.

While the SSCI had been successful in obtain-ing the microfilmed transcripts requested bythe Board, the Review Board remained con-cerned that the original hardcopy transcriptsfor this testimony, and any accompanyingmaterials, had not been located by the SSCIor otherwise accounted for. The ReviewBoard asked for access to all 450 boxes oforiginal Church Committee files. Again, SSCIwas cooperative and arranged to have theoriginal Church Committee files available forthe Board’s inspection (the originals had notpreviously been reviewed by the staffs ofNARA or the Review Board). The ReviewBoard staff inspected all the original files,and additional materials were designated asassassination re c o rds. However, the hardcopy of testimony cited in the JFK Assassina-tion Report was not among the materials.Although microfilm copies of this testimonywere available, the Review Board specificallyasked the SSCI to explain the absence of thehard copy files, particularly since they were adiscrete and significant body of records relat-ing to the Kennedy assassination. At the timeof this Report, the SSCI could not explain theabsence of these original transcripts (and per-haps accompanying materials) relating to theKennedy assassination.

3. House Select Committee on Intelligence (the Pike Committee)

In 1975, the Pike Committee investigated var-ious issues regarding the intelligence com-munity. The Pike Committee also looked intocertain discrete, limited issues regarding theassassination of President Kennedy. The PikeCommittee records have been under the cus-tody of the House Permanent Select Commit-tee on Intelligence (HPSCI). HPSCI identifiedapproximately three boxes of assassination-

164

related records of the Pike Committee andhas placed them into the JFK Collection.

4. House Judiciary Subcommittee onCivil & Constitutional Rights, Chaired by Congressman DonEdwards (the Edwards Subcommittee)

In 1975 and 1976, the Edwards Subcommitteeinvestigated the FBI’s destruction of a notethat Lee Harvey Oswald delivered to the Dal-las Field Office prior to the assassination ofP resident Kennedy. The Review Board raisedwith NARA’s Center for Legislative A rc h i v e sthe issue of whether they had any originalfiles for this subcommittee. The LegislativeA rchives staff could not identify any such fileswithin its Judiciary Committee re c o rds. TheReview Board also asked the Clerk’s Office ofthe House of Representatives for assistance inlocating these re c o rds. Unfortunately, no orig-inal re c o rds for this subcommittee have beenlocated, although copies of some of thesere c o rds can be found in the HSCA Collection.

5. House Government Operation’ sSubcommittee on Government Information and Individual Rights,Chaired by Congresswoman BellaAbzug (the Abzug Subcommittee)

In 1975 and 1976, the Abzug Subcommitteelooked into issues relating to access to War-ren Commission records and the destructionof FBI records. It was the Review Board’sunderstanding that these records remainedclosed pursuant to House Rules. In 1996, andagain in 1997, the Review Board sought Con-gressional authorization to have any assassi-nation-related records within the Abzug Sub-committee files reviewed and released underthe JFK Act. After receiving the appropriateC o n g ressional authorization, the ReviewBoard staff inspected the original files of theAbzug Subcommittee and designated vari-ous materials for release under the JFK Act.

6. House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC)

During the 1950s and 1960s, this Committeeinvestigated “un-American” activities of vari-ous individuals and groups. In the summer of1996, the staff of NARA’s Center for Legisla-tive A rchives did an initial survey of theHUAC files and identified files on Lee Harvey

Oswald, Marina Oswald, the Fair Play forCuba Committee (FPCC), and Mark Lane (aWa r ren Commission critic). Under HouseRules, investigative re c o rds of a House com-mittee may be closed for fifty years after thecommittee finishes their investigation andshuts down.

In November 1996, the Review Boardrequested that Congress make these recordsavailable for inspection by the Review Boardto confirm whether the records initially iden-tified by NARA s t a ff were assassinationrecords and should be released to the public.The Review Board received no responses andraised the matter again in 1997. In January1998, the Clerk’s Office sought permissionfrom the Judiciary Committee to open up theHUAC files for Review Board inspection. TheJudiciary Committee initially denied theBoard’s request, but upon reconsiderationultimately agreed to release substantialHUAC files relating to the JFK assassination.

7. Library of Congress

The Library of Congress did not transmit anyassassination re c o rds to the JFK Collectionafter passage of the Act. In June 1994, theLibrary of Congress responded to an inquiryby the Review Board and reported that it hadlocated no assassination-related re c o rd swithin the classified holdings in its Manu-script Division. In 1996, the Review Boardasked the Library of Congress, including theC o n g ressional Research Service, to ensure thatit had searched for any non-public re c o rds inits custody that might relate to the assassina-tion. The Library of Congress took no actionon the Review Board’s request, and the Boardmade another formal request in October 1997.The Congressional Research Service deferre dcompliance with the JFK Act pending explicitC o n g ressional authorization. Aside from CRS,h o w e v e r, the Library of Congress undertookto survey its non-public holdings to identifyre c o rds relating to the assassination. Thisentailed review of the Library’s closed re c o rd sin its Manuscript Division.

The Library of Congress filed a formal state-ment of compliance with the Review Boardand identified three sets of closed recordscontaining assassination-related materials:(1) a “duplicate and partial” set of Rocke-feller Commission records donated by Vice-

165

President Rockefeller and closed until March25, 2002; (2) papers of Senator Daniel Moyni-han from his tenure as Assistant Secretary ofLabor in the Kennedy Administration; and(3) papers of Howard Liebengood, an aide toSenator Howard Baker, who did work relat-ing to the assassination for the Senate Intelli-gence Committee. The Library also identifiedrelevant collections that were pre v i o u s l yopen to the public, including papers of EarlWa r ren, David Atlee Phillips, and ElmerGertz (attorney for Jack Ruby). In addition,the Library had one piece of correspondencewritten by Lee Harvey Oswald while he wasin the Soviet Union.

Once the relevant closed materials were iden-tified, the Review Board sought the donors’permission to open the records. The ReviewBoard obtained Senator Moynihan’s agree-ment to open his papers relating to the assas-sination, and the Board has been in theprocess of obtaining Mr. Liebengood’s con-sent. The Library of Congress stated that itsRockefeller Commission records were dupli-cates of the Rockefeller Commission files atthe Ford Library. The Ford Library reviewedand processed assassination records from theRockefeller Commission under the JFK Act.The Review Board has requested the Libraryof Congress to ascertain whether its set of theRockefeller Commission papers contains anyassassination-related materials that have notbeen released by the Ford Library.

In the Summer of 1998, the Congre s s i o n a lR e s e a rch Service (CRS) identified one box ofmemoranda relating to the assassination thatw e re pre p a red by CRS for the HSCA and otherentities. Having received appropriate Congre s-sional authorization, CRS has agreed to for-w a rd these materials to the JFK Collection.

8. Other Congressional Records

The NARA and Review Board staffs alsoexamined certain other Congre s s i o n a lrecords to identify any materials that mightbe considered “assassination-related” underthe JFK Act.

The Review Board was given appropriateCongressional authorization to inspect filesof the Senate Select Committee on ImproperActivities in the Labor or Management Field(the Mclellan Committee). This committee

investigated labor practices in the late 1950s;then Senator John Kennedy was a member ofthe committee and Robert F. Kennedy wasChief Counsel. The records of the committeeinclude information on organized crime fig-ures. It was determined that the records ofthe committee did not qualify as assassina-tion records under the JFK Act.

The Review Board surveyed the indices to1949–51 records of the Senate Special Com-mittee to investigate Organized Crime inInterstate Commerce (the Kefauver Commit-tee). Given the remoteness in time from theevents of the assassination, no records of theKefauver Committee were designated asassassination re c o rds. More o v e r, Congre s shas authorized NARA to open these recordsin 2001.

The Review Board and NARA i d e n t i f i e dcertain re c o rds of the Senate Judiciary’s Sen-ate Internal Security Subcommittee (theEastland Committee) for review under theJFK Act. Thirteen transcripts of executivesession testimony were subsequently identi-fied for release under the JFK Act. Thesew e re processed by the Center for LegislativeA rchives and transmitted to the JFK Collec-tion. The re c o rds included 1961 testimony ofEdwin Walker and December 1963 testi-mony of Ruth Paine. In addition, the Centerfor Legislative A rchives transmitted to theJFK Collection three boxes of press clippingsre g a rding Lee Harvey Oswald and thea s s a s s i n a t i o n .

D. CONCLUSION

Generally, government offices attempted tos e a rch for and release their assassinationrecords in compliance with the JFK Act. Mostimportantly, this was the case with the majoragencies, such as the FBI, CIA, Department ofState, Department of Justice, Secret Service,NARA, and the Presidential Libraries, thatwould be expected to have core materialsrelating to the assassination. In some cases,particular agencies conducted searches afterthe Review Board notified them of theirobligations.

By initiating a compliance program, theBoard decided to require the relevant agen-cies to affirmatively document their workunder the JFK Act, including certification

166

that they had conducted diligent searches forassassination records. The individual offi-cials who represented the agencies were pro-fessional and cooperative in meeting the sub-stantive and procedural requirements of theBoard’s compliance program.

With some limited exceptions, almost all ofthe federal entities this chapter discusseshave explained and certified, under penaltyof perjury, their efforts to locate and releaseall relevant records on the assassination ofP resident Kennedy. The Board anticipatesthat these statements, under oath, willenhance the public’s confidence that theUnited States government, in good faith,attempted to release all re c o rds on theKennedy assassination.

167

CHAPTER 8ENDNOTES

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 obtainedfrom 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 onassassination records processing.

5 In the spring of 1997, Marina Oswald provided limited consent to the IRS to release LeeHarvey Oswald’s tax returns to researchers Ray and Mary La Fontaine. Marina Oswalddeclared her intent to have the La Fontaines release these returns to the public, but to ourknowledge 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 re c o rds were also located in the files of the HSCA, and they werereleased along with the other HSCA f i l e s .

7 In addition to records identified by the Southwest Region of NARA, the SoutheastRegion had identified some papers of Senator Richard Russell relating to his work on theWarren Commission. (NARA had been providing courtesy storage for these papers on behalfof the University of Georgia.)

8 Among the Ford papers transmitted to the JFK Collection were excerpts of interviewswith President Ford conducted by Trevor Armbrister in connection with the writing of Ford’smemoirs, A Time to Heal.

9 The Robert F. Kennedy Donor Committee controls access to all RFK papers under a Deedof Gift agreement with the JFK Library.

10 In addition, the JFK Library is releasing the RFK and other papers pursuant to the declas-sification requirements of Executive Order 12958.

11 These materials were identified in a detailed index entitled, “Guide to Materials from theJohnson Library Pertaining to the Assassination of John F. Kennedy.”

168