◆ SpookStack

OPTIONAL FORM MO. 19 Gia ima aren 101-486 @ r an id - UNITED STATES .NMENT 2 Assoc. Din, Dep. AD Adm, __ Bep. AD Ine. nae Dir.: Memorandum. Adm. Serv. \ Ext. AHoirs — 1 oat bal 7 - dD | ’ Fin, & Pace. TO : “ho Associate Mir fa DATE: 11/4/76 Gen. Inv. . Ident. 2 a Inspection — FROM : heqal cous rel on 2 stnject; CIVIL RIGHTS PIVISION INQUIRY CONCFPNING Ree. SURREPTITIOUS FNTPTIFS CONDUCTED DY THE FRI ana Telachons Rm. __ Dieactor Sec’y PURPOSE: To report that o (i. « this Division was interviewed by two SAs assianed to the Civil Rights Mivision syecial. SYVOPSIS AND PEPAILGS: On 10/26/76, Special Acentes (sis) (ED cre who are assioned to the Civil Pights Division snecial, advise “' ee -: follows: That morning aren thev were Furnished a “erox cory of an undated memorané@un from Legal Counsel to Mr. F.S. Miller cantioned "% Rill to Pstablish Guidelines and Procedures for Oomestic Security “Lectronic furveillances.' The first paragraph of this nemerancum, “hich was dictated hy Ss? necifies: "On 4/12/74 ntellicence Pivision, reavested that wee ee ss this cffice {leaal Counsel] draft a bill that if anvroved bv “ ° *Senaress would authorize the FRI to conduct, with court apnroval, electronic domestic security surveillances. Attached hereto is a suqgested hill. This matter, it is noted, is heing bo prenarod in connection with the Intelligence Division's "ask reo Force Study on Privacy." Ww Sa <) ED + QP = avises that De tmental Attorney William Cardner requested that 5 ARE cornish information responsive to three questions: (1) Was reauest to the Legal Counsel Office written or oral? What were the circumstances surrounding the request? (3) What “aA sts action was taken concerning the ‘bill"? Ti “ot / ; a 4 a — ac t.QO i | - we eo an a — al 1 - } Mintz c “ . ad CONTINUED - OVER y bon S (4) i : Buy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan vs Fev. 208 sorg—ltoe