◆ SpookStack

Loyalty Security Board . 7 7 Department of State oe . ee ee ee Dear Mr, Snowt | Thank you for your reply to ay lstter of inquiry of Ape 17, 1951. Inasmuch as you have coubined your statistics on both the loyalty —~— and security issues, it is necessary that I request clarificatio of the information and answers to further questions. —_- It was intended that the questions in ay letter would be directed : only to cases of applicants and employees coning within the operation of Executive Order No, 9635 and, therofore, your answers to the 5th and 6th questions require further discussion, ; How many full field investigations of State Department euployees ty the FRY under the provisions of Executive Order Ro, 9835 were referred to the Loyalty Board? There are no security provisions in Executive Order No. 9635, but if the FBI made investigations on a question of lavelty and these cases were cleared by your Loyalty Board but converted inte security cases, please say 80, but do not confuse security investiga- tions made by the FBI with loyalty investigations under the executive order. Thie will undoubtedly call for a review of your anever: to No. 6. From your answer to questions 6 and 7 it appears that 66 cases cleared by your board are pending before the loyelty Review Board on post audit. Am I correct in this assunption? a ; Out of the 323 cases cleared by your board and referred to the Loyalty Review Board for clearance on post audit, how many wore denied clearance . by the Loyalty Review Board and referred "back for your further consider ation? In your response to question 9 you mention one case found ineligible under Bxecutive Order No, 9935 and also found to be a security risk. Vas this enployee renoved, and, 1f sc, was the removal mide under the provisions of Executive Order No, 9335 or as a security risk?