for good cause elects to hold the hearings at an earlier date, and let the record show that Chairman Hébert's concurrence with the public announcement of the meeting on September 23, 1974 has been made. At this time I will recognize Mr. Bray for a motion. Mr. BRAY. Mr. Chairman, I move the subcommittee now go into executive session. Mr. HÉBERT. I second the motion. Mr. NEDZI. Will you poll the members please? Mr. SLATINSHEK. Mr. Nedzi. Mr. NEDZI. Aye. Mr. SLATINSHEK. Mr. Hébert. Mr. SLATINSHEK. Mr. Price. Mr. SLATINSHEK. Mr. Arends. Mr. ARENDS. Aye. Mr. SLATINSHEK. Mr. Wilson. Mr. WILSON. Aye. STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL HARRINGTON, REPRESENTATIVE FROM MASSACHUSETTS Mr. HARRINGTON. Mr. Chairman, I think it might be, if I may have your permission to be heard while we still have an audience, useful to renew a request I made of you yesterday afternoon to consider the usefulness from any perspective one would choose to arrive at of open session on the question that you pose this morning, and further to indicate that despite the stridence of the language that was used in the letter that has been made a part of the record, that a conversation occurred between yourself and myself on about September 12 of this year asking whether or not I would be willing to come before this committee to meet with them and discuss the subject which has prompted this meeting this morning, and further that I agreed readily to do so, suggesting that the meeting could be held that afternoon if it were convenient to the members, and that if any confusion ensued, which I have no objection to, attendant to setting of the date of the meeting, it ensued largely because of apparently a lack of effective communication mutually on the question of a date, but there has been no effort made at not being willing or not being entirely in concert with what you state as one of the interests you have in calling the meeting on my part. Mr. NEDZI. The Chair will state in response that he confirms what the gentleman from Massachusetts has said. On my first call to him he expressed readiness and willingness to attend the hearing at a mutually agreeable time. In fact we talked about one within a day or two, but because of the gentleman's schedule and the Chair's schedule we could not arrange a date prior to today. There was some confusion between the Chair and counsel for the subcommittee, each thinking that the gentleman from Massachusetts had been contacted, and at no time was there any suggestion of unwilling ness on the part of the gentleman from Massachusetts to appear before the subcommittee to testify. Mr. HARRINGTON. My only other procedural question, and one that may appear to be somewhat insensitively offered, is that I, in coming here freely this morning and in hoping that you might reconsider the usual setting for meetings of this kind and leave it open, would expect that since I am obviously a principal to this morning's proceeding that I have a copy of the transcript of this morning's proceedings with you before it is made a part of any record. Mr. NEDZI. The Chair at the moment sees no objection to that, but we will have to put that to the subcommittee. Mr. HARRINGTON. It would seem to me to be in a sense an unnecessarily, if this is voluntarily arrived at, causing problems about Mr. NEDZI. Let me say that witnesses before the committee have access to the transcript as a matter of course. Mr. HARRINGTON. Would you describe access to me so that I have a clear understanding of what that means in this instance? Mr. SLATINSHEK. Mr. Chairman, if I may interrupt, that means that the witness will review the transcript in the committee hearing room or in the committee rooms. The traditional procedure of the committee does not require that we provide the witness with a copy of the transcript. We simply make the transcript available to him for editorial changes and grammatical changes in his testimony and for an opportunity to review the testimony that he provided the subcommittee or the committee. This is the traditional manner in which the committee operates. Mr. HARRINGTON. Let me then restate my request, that because of the nature of the hearing, because of the background, this being requested of me, I would ask that I have not just access to the material, but have a copy of the record for whatever use I may choose to make of it. Mr. NEDZI. The Chair will restate his response to the gentleman. That matter will be put to the subcommittee and the gentleman will be advised. Mr. HARRINGTON. I think it is important to be understood before proceeding in terms of my own sense of the need for this and the need not to rely on the usual method of operation, and I would expect that the gentlemen sitting beside you might, given the reversal of roles, as much as they might think that unlikely, want the same courtesy afforded them. Mr. NEDZI. I hear what the gentleman is saying but, unfortunately, we don't know what kind of information is going to be disclosed in the course of the hearing and because of the experience that the subcommittee has had there is some question with respect to the procedures in handling classified information. Consequently, I don't think that the subcommittee is in position to respond to the gentleman's request at this time, at this point in time, as they say in Washington. Mr. HARRINGTON. I find myself somewhat puzzled only that the essence of the information that is the subject of concern has been at least in the broadest sense endorsed or ratified by the President of this country and by the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. What else is there in terms of your concern that would prompt a further concern about wanting to have a proceeding that I am the central figure in available to me on something other than the usual Armed Services Committee basis. Mr. NEDZI. Well, the Chair will state that he is not in position to accede to the gentleman's request at this time and the gentleman, of course is free to refuse to testify under the arrangement. That is up to him. Mr. HARRINGTON. I have never really been remotely inclined to refuse to testify. I am just really attempting to establish, so we have no ambiguity, and a feeling that I think is an entirely defensible one, that the reason for the hearing is obvious; the witness that you have is essential to the hearing. I would certainly not find it satisfactory to accept, even by my silence or any ambiguity about my response, Mr. Slatinshek's definition of what access means. Without protesting that I think it violates essentially what would be my rights prospectively. Mr. NEDZI. I think that we have gone as far as we can go on the point and the vote being 5 to 0 in favor of an executive session the Chair will announce the subcommittee will now go into executive session. [Whereupon, at 10:49 a.m. the special subcommittee recessed to go into executive session.] The special subcommittee met, pursuant to open session, at 10:50 a.m. in room 2337, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lucien N. Nedzi (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Representatives Nedzi, Hébert, Bray, Arends, and Wilson. Also present: Frank M. Slatinshek, chief counsel and William H. Hogan, Jr., counsel. Mr. NEDZI. May we ask counsel to read a memorandum for the record dated September 12, 1974. Mr. SLATINSHEK. I am reading a memorandum for the record dated September 12, 1974: [The following information was received for the record:] MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD SUBJECT: APPARENT MISUSE OF INFORMATION RECEIVED BY A MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM HIS REVIEW OF AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TRANSCRIPT OF THE ARMED SERVICES SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE 1. The New York Times, on Sunday, September 8, 1974, carried a story, dateline Washington, September 7, 1974, by Seymour Hersh, containing information allegedly obtained by Congressman Michael Harrington (D-Mass.) from his reading of the Subcommittee on Intellegence transcript dated April 22, 1974. 2. Congressman Harrington had obtained access to this transcript, classified "Top Secret", by virtue of his oral request to Subcommittee Chairman Lucien N. Nedzi, and the subsequent approval of Chairman F. Edw. Hébert. Access to the transcript was provided Mr. Harrington with the clear understanding that availability of the transcript was subject to both the Rules of the House of Representatives and the Rules of the Committee on Armed Services. 3. By way of background, Rule XI, Clause 27(c), provides that all Committee hearings, records, files, etc., shall be the property of the House and all Members of the House shall have access to such records. 4. House Rule XI, Clause 27(o) provides as follows: “No evidence or testimony taken in executive session may be released or used in public sessions without the consent of Committee." 5. In view of the access of Members to all documents and data received by the Committee as provided by Rule XI, Clause 27 (c), and the limited safeguard on the utilization of this material as provided by Rule XI, Clause 27(0) being limited to executive session material, there remained a serious question as to how the Committee on Armed Services could provide adequate security on confidential material received by the Committee outside of executive session as well as material of a particularly sensitive nature. 6. In view of these circumstances, the Committee, on February 27, 1973, in establishing its Committee Rules, included in Rule No. 10, the following language: "All national security information bearing a classification of secret or higher which has been received by the committee or a subcommittee of the Committee on Armed Services shall be deemed to have been received by the Committee in executive session and shall be given appropriate safekeeping." 7. Pursuant to Committee Rule No. 10, Chairman Hebert, on April 3, 1973, promulgated rules providing for the proper protection of classified information in the Committee files and making this material available to Members of the House of Representatives. S. As previously indicated, Congressman Harrington requested access to a Top Secret transcript of testimony received in executive session by the Subcommittee on Intelligence on April 22, 1974. The testimony was provided by the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and related to his Agency's activities in Chile. 9. In accordance with the Committee Rule, Congressman Harrington contacted the Chief Counsel of the Committee, Mr. Slatinshek, and was given access to the transcript in question. However, before being provided the transcript, Congressman Harrington was, in accordance with the Rules established by the Committee on Armed Services, asked to read the Rules applying to Members of the House who requested access to classified information in the Committee files. Congressman Harrington was handed these Rules; and after perusing these Rules, signed a statement, which reads as follows: "I have read the Rules of the Committee on Armed Services relative to access by Members of the House of Representatives to classified information in the Committee files, and I agree to honor those rules." 10. A copy of the Committee Rules is attached as promulgated by Chairman Hebert by letter dated April 3, 1973. Also included is a copy of Armed Services Staff Memorandum 93-4, dated April 5, 1973, calling attention to these Rules to the members of the staff handling classified material. SUMMARY The news article appearing in the New York Times and other news media throughout the country indicates that Congressman Harrington had addressed a "confidential seven-page leter . . . to Representative Thomas E. Morgan, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, [which] was made available to the New York Times." Other news media articles indicated that a similar letter was sent by Congressman Harrington to Senator Fulbright, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. At this point in time, it is evident that the information received by the Armed Services Subcommittee on Intelligence was leaked to the news media. However, no information is presently available to the Committee on Armed Services which would indicate the manner in which this information was leaked to the news media except that it appears evident that this information was obtained as a result of Congressman Harrington's review of the Subcommittee testimony and his subsequent correspondence with the Chairmen of the House Foreign Affairs and the Senate Foreign Relations Committees. It is apparent that the Committee on Armed Services must take appropriate measures to insure that security leaks of this kind can not occur in the future. In addition to the problem confronting the Committee on Armed Services, there is also a problem directly involving the House Rules. Since House Rule XI, Clause 27(0) precludes the use of executive session testimony unless authorized by the Committee, it appears evident that a direct violation of this House Rule is also involved. FRANK M. SLATINSHEK, Chief Counsel. Mr. SLATINSHEK. Attachments to this memorandum include a copy of the committee rules promulgated by Chairman Hébert by letter of April 3, 1974, the Armed Services Staff Memorandum No. 93-4 of April 5, 1974, and a copy of the statement signed by Congressman Michael Harrington on the 2 days on which he had reviewed this testimony and this transcript. The dates were June 4, 1974, and June 12, 1974. With the permission of the Chair I would like to include this memorandum as I have read it in the record. Mr. NEDZI. Including the attachments. Mr. SLATINSHEK. Including the attachments. Mr. NEDZI. Without objection it will be entered into the record. [The following information was received for the record:] U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, .COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES, MEMORANDUM FOR: FRANK M. SLATINSIEK, CHIEF COUNSEL SUBJECT: RULES FOR ACCESS BY MEMBERS TO CLASSIFIED INFORMATION IN THE COMMITTEE FILES The Rules Governing Procedure in the 93rd Congress adopted by the Committee charge me with the responsibility for proper protection of classified information in the Committee files and at the same time to provide for access to such material by Members of the House of Representatives. Accordingly, I have prepared the attached set of rules on the subject for appropriate implementation. Sincerely, (S) F. EDW. HÉBERT, Chairman. RULES OF THE HOUSE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE TO BE FOLLOWED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS WHO WISH TO READ CLASSIFIED INFORMATION IN THE COMMITTEE FILES: (1) Classified information will be kept in secure safes in the committee rooms. Members will be admitted to the reading room (Room 2114-A) after inquiring of the Executive Secretary in Room 2120, extension 54151. (2) Before receiving access to such classified information Members of Congress will be required to identify the document or information they desire to read, identify themselves to the staff member assigned and sign the Secret Information Sheet, if such is attached to the document. (3) The reading room will be open during regular committee hours. (4) Only Members of Congress may have access to such information. (5) Such information may not be removed from the reading room, and a staff member will be present at all times. (6) The staff member will maintain an access list (log) identifying the Member, the material and the time of arrival and departure of all Members having such access to such classified information. (7) A staff representative will ensure that the classified documents used by the Member are returned to the proper custodian or to original safekeeping as appropriate. (8) No notes, reproductions or recordings may be made of any portion of such classified information. (9) The contents of such classified information will not be divulged to any unauthorized person in any way, form, shape or manner. (10) The log will contain a statement acknowledged by the Member's signature that he has read the committee rules and will honor them. U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, ARMED SERVICES STAFF MEMORANDUM No. 93-4 SUBJECT: RULES FOR ACCESS BY MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO CLASSIFIED INFORMATION IN THE COMMITTEE FILES Rule No. 10 of the Rules of Procedure for the operation of the Committee during the 93rd Congress, adopted by the Committee on February 27, 1973, charge the Chairman with the responsibility for proper protection of classified information in the Committee files. The third paragraph of Rule No. 10 reads as follows: "The Chairman of the full committee shall establish such procedures as in his judgment may be necessary to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of any na |