Mr. BELISLE. Yes, sir. Mr. SOURWINE. What are your duties in your present job? Mr. BELISLE. My duties are to prepare the cases for review by the Panel. The Advisory Review Board handles the more difficult and the higher officers' security and suitability cases, personnel cases, and the Personnel Panel handles all the security and personnel disciplinary actions. No disciplinary personnel actions are taken in the Department at this time without the approval of the Panel. Mr. SOURWINE. The Panel you spoke of is primarily concerned with security cases? Mr. BELISLE. Both sir. Mr. SOURWINE. And you prepare both? Mr. BELISLE. Right sir. Mr. SOURWINE. Are you the last person in responsibility to see that a case is properly prepared for the Panel? Mr. BELISLE. Yes, sir. Mr. SOURWINE. Who is your immediate supervisor? Mr. BELISLE. Mr. Crockett. Mr. SOURWINE. You report directly to him? Mr. BELISLE. Yes, sir. Mr. SOURWINE. Have you served at any time, or had anything to do with, a project for reviewing or updating the security files of top-level security personnel in the State Department? Mr. BELISLE. No, sir. Well, as part of my duties as executive secretary for the Advisory Review Board; I have looked over some of these files, but to say that I have had it as a project; no, I have taken certain cases. Mr. SOURWINE. Do you have authority to make any decisions about what cases go to the Review Board? Mr. BELISLE. Well, I have, on my own, let's say, prepared cases for the Board. "PROBLEM CASES" EXPLAINED The participation of Mr. Belisle in the coodination of actions on security "problem cases" was explained by Mr. Crockett.20 Mr. SOURWINE. Does he [Mr. Belisle] have anything to do with the reevaluation or evaluation of security cases? Mr. CROCKETT. No, sir. Mr. SOURWINE. Or the review Mr. CROCKETT. Well, when you say "have anything to do," it is very broad. If you want to take the time, I'll tell you what he does. Mr. SOURWINE. Certainly. Mr. CROCKETT. One of the recommendations of this committee, out of one of your reports, was that the operation of the Office of Security and its deliberations on security should be more closely associated with the operation of the Office of Personnel; that security, suitability, medical problems were all part of the same ball of wax. Around the first of the year, I tied all these things together in my office. Mr. Belisle is acting as executive secretary on this operation. He goes to the Office of Personnel, the Office of Security, the inspection corps, the bureaus in trying to find and soliciting from them problem cases, personnel cases that are presently under review, a suitability problem, an alcoholic problem, a health problem, a psychiatric problem, or a security problem or any of the others. Every Friday afternoon, at 4:30, I believe, the Director of Personnel, the Director of Security, myself, the Director General of the Foreign Service, the Legal Adviser for Administrative Matters, the Office of Personnel, meet and we go over this list of people that have problems, whether they are a security problem or a medical problem or a personnel problem or a suitability problem, to discuss the disposition of the case and the relationship between security and personnel and suitability, so that no one outfit passes the buck like they used to. Security said, "Oh, this is a suitability case," and the Personnel people said, "I don't think this is suitability, this ought to be Security," and then they said, "Well, this is really medical"-enforcing a decision on this so that action is taken on each item. So this is what Mr. Belisle is doing. Mr. SOURWINE. It enables you to place responsibility? 20 State Department Security hearings, pt. 13, pp. 997-998. Mr. CROCKETT. It enables me to play a very important personal role in this. Where before you had the cases where you would find that the Office of Personnel and Security centered over there, and they said, "Well, this really isn't security, you ought to look after suitability," and Personnel said, "Well, we'll slap you on the wrist or put a letter in your file." All I want to do is to be sure the punishment fits the situation and get at the bottom of these cases. PERSONNEL SECURITY REVIEW PANEL How the Review Panel operated and the role in it played by David I. Belisle were questioned closely by the Internal Security Subcom mittee. William J. Crockett established in his office a mechanism to coordinate personnel security cases needing review at the highest level because of derogatory information to be evaluated. In his testimony of May 4, 1965, Mr. Crockett identified the Panel's membership as follows: 1 Mr. SOURWINE. Please give the names of individuals who, ex officio, compose the "Personnel and Security Advisory Boards." Mr. CROCKETT. I have appointed a Personnel Review Panel. It is composed of myself, the Director General of the Foreign Service, the Inspector General, Assistant Secretary for Administration, Director of Personnel, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Security, Legal Adviser, and the Medical Director, also a special assistant from my Office as Secretary. The initial Executive Secretary was David I. Belisle. The duties of the Executive Secretary were formalized in a memorandum by Mr. Crockett on August 26, 1964, as: 3 II. SPECIFIC DUTIES More specifically (but not exclusively) the executive secretary will: 1. Establish channels with SY, PER, MED, and the regional bureaus so that he will be given promptly adverse information on employees received or developed by these offices and bureaus. 2. Will prepare agenda for each meeting. 3. Review the files and memoranda on all cases presented to the panel to insure that all pertinent data is included. 4. Insure that decisions and requests for additional information by the panel are carried out or submitted properly and promptly. 5. Will prepare minutes of all meetings. WILLIAM J. CROCKETT. While his special assistant, Belisle, accumulated data from areas for review by the Panel, Mr. Crockett testified he, and no one else, presided at the meeting of the Panel. The specific duties were enumerated above after Mr. Belisle was finally transferred from the Office of Security's payroll in August 16, 1964.5 However, the Department outlined Mr. Belisle's duties and his relationship to the Office of Security in its letter of September 8, 1964, portions of which read: 5 Hon. JAMES O. EASTLAND, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE, Chairman, Internal Security Subcommittee, U.S. Senate. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: *** Mr. David Belisle was detailed from the Office of Security on December 9, 1963, and was made a special assistant to Mr. Crockett. For payroll purposes Mr. Belisle's name was continued in the Office of Security until August 16, 1964, when he was converted from GS-16 to FSR-2. Mr. Crockett used Mr. Belisle as Executive Secretary of the Personnel and Security Advisory Boards which were recently established by the Department. These Boards are composed of the Deputy Under Secretary for Administration, the Assistant Secretary for Administration, the Director General of the Foreign Service, the Inspector General of the Foreign Service, and the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Security. Other observers are called when needed (the Director of Personnel, the Director of the Medical Branch, etc.) The purpose of these Boards is to review every case of employee security and suitability and insure that the interest of the U.S. Government is paramount in settling issues of misconduct or possible security problems on the part of Foreign Service and civil service employees alike. These Boards insure that there is a direct linkage between the security processes and problem on one hand, and the personnel consideration on the other. Effective August 16, 1964, Mr. Belisle is being assigned to the Embassy in Germany as assistant administrative_officer and Mr. George W. French, Jr., will act as Executive Secretary of the Panel. Sincerely, ROBERT E. LEE, Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Congressional Relations. Mr. Crockett was insistent that Mr. Belisle exercised no influence over the outcome of security cases in spite of coordinating the information. Here is one of Mr. Crockett's statements: " Mr. CROCKETT. The job description of Mr. French is entirely different from that of Mr. Belisle. I would like to clarify for the record that neither Mr. Belisle or Colonel French exercises any direct control over the outcome of specific security cases. Colonel French's duty is to insure the coordination of judgments involved in security (Office of Security) and suitability (Office of Personnel) in arriving at a final decision on these cases and to see that the final recommendations are enacted. And another statement:7 Mr. SOURWINE. Did Mr. Belisle, after he left the Office of Security, to any extent or in any degree exercise any control over the affairs of the Office of Security? Mr. CROCKETT. No, sir. Mr. SOURWINE. Was he called upon for advice or recommendations with respect to the affairs of the Office of Security? Mr. CROCKETT. No, sir. Mr. Belisle, too, said he exercised no control over the management of the Office of Security after November 22, 1963.8 Thus, even though he was obliged to oversee the end result of personnel security cases and served in the area to which the Office of Security was a subordinate component, the distinctions made by Messrs. Crockett and Belisle seem more technical than actual. MR. BELISLE'S BACKGROUND The subcommittee cannot help but note that Mr. Belisle was a high ranking security official of the National Security Agency at the time of the defection of Bernon F. Mitchell and William H. Martin to the Soviet Union in the summer of 1960.9 10 Ibid., pt. 19, p. 1635. Ibid., pt. 11, p. 746. 10 Committee on Un-American Activities, House of Representatives Report, dated Aug. 13, 1962, “Security Practices in the National Security Agency." |