C06419940 PPROVED FOR RELEASE - CIA INFODATE 25-Au -2015 s rS'ITIVE ____ ___ 3lugust MEMORANDQM SUBJECT b 3 CI Met 1977 FOR THE RECOR The NUMEC Case - Discussion of the House· Energy Members and M r Carl Duck tt Retired with Staff Committee CIA Employee I Background On Z August 1977 in response to a request which Congressman Dingell D Michi n had levied on Mr Lyle Miller OLC a meeting was held in the office of the ADDO in order _ _ to discuss CIA I s knoorledge of the NUMEC diversion issue The meeting started at 0910 hours and lasted until 100 hours The bY 3YNsc···· pa rl t ip - ' session were Mr Duckett th former DDS · b tM and now retired emp1 oyl e oLC Mr Frank M 3 C ct Potter Cormsel and Staff Director of the Subcommittee on Energy and Power of the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce Mr Peter D Stockton Res·earch Assistant of the Sub- committee ·on Energy and Power of the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Cominerce and Mr Shackley ADDO 2 Committ e Interests At the start of the 2 Augu t meeting M r • Shackley stated that the Agency was currently in the process of its records in order to b able to answer those questions consolidating relative to the NUMEC diversion case which we assumed would be· put to us by various Congressional committees that were currently looking at the issues of nuclear mat rials that are unaccounted for In this context Mr Shackley said that he was neither· a scientist nor a first-hand participant in the events which had unfolded in the period 1968 to 1977 relative to the NUMEC case It was pointed out that Mr Shackley's role in this matter was one of providing upervision to the people who were conducting the research ·on the Agenc y 1 s involvement in the NUMEG case Additionally it was made clear that I ····················· b ° 3 ·CtAAct b 3 CIMct - c • - - C06419940 PPROVED FOR RELEASE - CIA INFO DATE 25-Au -2015 ·' -2- I Mr Shackley had provided staff support to Mr Knoche when he was the NUMEC case in selected Washington· he DDCI and was discussing The Congressional staff · 'councils in the May 1977 time frame members were also informed that the file material which had been to date revealed variou s gaps in CIA I s records in that not collected out by senior CIA all of the conversations which had been carried officials on the NUMEC question had been recorded At that juncture Mr Duckett chimed in to say that he personally had been a participant aroa rid Washington on the NUMEC issue on in sever l key discussions · which he had written no _memoranda for the record therefore he the frustrations that were being encountered by Mr could understand in their attempts to fully recon truct the Shackley and his associates dui-ing the time fra rne 1968 to-1977 re tive events which had transpired to the NUMEC diversion issue In this context Mr Shackley asked if the Congrefisional Staffers could facilitate our research effort by clearly i1 1sofar as GIA was of concern identifying to us their reas of interest to them relative to the NUMEC case The Staff Members particularly responded by saying that they were interested in two points Mr Potter 'The first of these was whether CIA h d conducted an investigation into by NUMEC The·Staff Members' the diversion of n11clear ·materials had second line of inquiry focused on whether CIA as an instituti n been involved in the diversion 3 Discussion The Congressional Staff Members wer e clea rly interested in hearing first-hand from Mr Duckett his recollection of the vents surrounding the NUMEC case and his role in such activities became the Staff Members' As a result the first order of basiness The entire session debriefing of Mr Duckett abo t his recoUections was free-flowing and ranged simultaneously over a number of different is a distillation of the key points issues What follows therefore The key issues th t were that emerged from the 2 August session in this meeting can be identified as follows discussed Issue a CIA Interest in the NUMEC Diversion According to· Mr Duckett CIA had been concerned about th nuclear weapons proliferation issue for a number of years '----------- -----------------' b 1 b 3 NatSecAct EO 13526 3 3 b 6 25Yrs 25X1 C06419940 PP ROVEDFOR RELEASE- CIA INFO DATE 25-Au -2015 ' b 1 b 3 NatSecAct EQ 13526 3 3 b 6 25Yrs b $ CIAAct 'tt 1 b' 3 NatSecAct E0 _ 5263 3 b 6 25Yrs -3- 25X1 25X1 As a result CIA began ·to look at information which wa s· available to it concerning the possible diversion o uraniwn materials from NUMEC Mr Duc ett s ated that as he recalled the situation approximately 178 kilo1 ams of urani were missing from NUMEC · b -1 en b 3 NatS cAct Duckett was questioned closely EO 13526 3 '3 b q 25Yrs Shackley and the Congressional ······ mo st -t elling point in is Mr on this point by both Mr Staffers he sai hypothesis was the fac that his_ 25X1 b 3 NSC -- b 3 CIAAct that Mr This produced the response 7 '-o u- c k et t -c -- o - u i· not recall the exact details of why he had reached this c·onclusion He did state however that ·---- could clarify this point Sub sequenl discussions with revealed that wha t Mr · ·Buckett a eared· to be referring to b 1 Per FBI b t1 b 3 NatSecAct EO 1 526 3 3 b 6 25Yrs SENJ TIVE s1 ET 25X1 C06419940 PPROVED FOR RELEASE CIA INFO DATE 25-Au -2015 -4- Yb C1 b 3 NatSecAct Eb 13526 3 3 b 6 25Yrs b ·CIA Investigation into NUMEC Diversion Mr Duc kett told the Congressional Staffers t at he knew of no CIA investigation into the NUMEG dil ersion issue • His point was that CIA was the recipient of FBI and AEC material on the alleged diversion and this data influenced the CIA e·stimating process on the key issue of did Israel have a nuclear weapons system Mr Sha kley confirmed to the Congr essional Staffers that the records did not show that ·cIA had conducted any kind of a n investigation th United States concerning the NUMEC diversion Mr Shackley did stress however that Mr Helms as DCI had written to the A tto rney General in 1968 in order to ask that an investigation 1 e initiated by the Justice Department into ·the possibilities that the diversion of n clear materials from NUMEC had taken place The Congressi nal Staffers were also advise constantly _ ___ __ _ 2sx1 L_ _________________ - -- _____ c ciA ·Involvement in a Diversion Operation Mr Duckett told the Congressional Staffers that he could say with certainty that CIA as an institution had not been involved in any kind of a nuclear materials diversion operation In this context Mr Duckett ·stressed·that he was Mr Helms' principal action officer on the question of nuclear proliferation and as such would have known had a diversion operation been mounted by the Agency In und erscoring this latter point Mr • Duckett stated that Mr Hehns had told hi In at an unrecalled date · but possibly in 196'8 This which Mr Helms instruction resulted from a briefing had apparently given President· Johnson b 1 b 3 NatSecAct EO 13526 3 3 b 6 25Yrs r I' ---•••••••••••• -· · -······-·-·· _ _ --··-•••••••••••' __ _ _ _ ·25X1 C06419940 ' PPROVEDFOR RELEASE- CIA INFO DATE 25-Au -2015 2 Ei 7 i11ve -5- t b t · b 3 NatSecA t EQ 13526 3 b 6 25Yrs 25X 1 · • 1 ------- ---- ----- far Duckett indicated there were no memothat to the best of his knowledge randa written on this meeting In response to specific · oJ 1- __ questions from the Congressional Staffers l A r Duckett b 3 NatSecAct stated that he knew of no U s Government policy to EO 13526 3 3 b 6 -25Y r$·£acilitate the diversion of nuclear materials to Israel 25X1 '-- · -------- ----- -- -- --- --- ---- --- - -- --- ----1 This latl er'stal ement launched Mr Duckett into the recounting of a story which focused on Mr George Murphy Staff Director of the Joint Comznittee on Atomic Ene rgy · who visited the NUMEC plant in Apollo Pennsylvania on a Swulay This visit persuaded Mr Murphy that any I Aft Mr Duckett #nished recounting this vignette Mr Shackley · ·made the point that the records of the Agency substantiated b 1 Mr Duckett's contention that the Organiz tion was not b 3 NatSecAct involved in any way in a diversion operation which might EO 13526 3 3 b 6 25Yr$iave resulted in nuclear materials going to Israel of d CIA Liaison with Department Justice and the FBI · The Congressional Staffers asked if CIA had been Justice Department and the FBI on in dialogue with the the NUMEC diversion question Mr Duckett stated that he recalled that Mr • Helms DCI had been in ·contact with both the Justice Department and the FBI Mr on the question of the NUMEC diversion problem Duckett said that he could no longer recall the dates of this dialogue _Mr Shackley stated that the records indicate that Mr Helms had sent a ·letter to Attorney General Ramsey Clark on the NUMEC case in April 1968 suggesting that an investigation be conducted into a possib J e diversion The point was also made by Mr indicate that the ·FBI did Shackley that the records C06419940 PPROVED FOR RELEASE - CIA INF O DATE 25-Au -2015 · -6- -launch an investigation in 1968 but terminated it in l n Octqber 1969 however Mr Helms was in contact with FBI Director Hoover in order to u r-ge that the investigation be reopened The Congressional was still in progress · Staffers asked if an FBI investigation and were advised by Mr Shackley that we did not know the status of the most current FBI investigation into the NUMEC case In this context the Congressional Staffers were informed that ·CIA had most recently discussed the NUMEC case with the FBI in the April May 1977 · time frarne 1969 e · CIA Briefing of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr Duckett was asked by the Congressional Staffers if he had ever briefed the NRG on the NUMEC case and or Israeli weapons capability This produced the response that Mr Duckett recalled briefing the NRC ·m the February 1976 time fraI 1e The ·congressional Staffers asked if Mr Duckett co_uld re call who was present at this briefing · The response was that Mr Ducke t t could only remember that the meeting had consisted of NRG staff personnel In this context he also made reference to the fact that he had ·subseq1 1ently been told by the Counsel for the NRC Comment that they had too many people at this briefing A post meetin review o the data contained in this J_l _°f ---···- • ··-···-··-···--··-··-·-·····-·····--·pa-rag-raph· wi n··Z-·A·u·g·usFrev ls b 3 NSC that he recalls at Mr Duckett ha informed him after b 3 CIAAct that Mr William Anders Chairman the NRC briefing of -the NRC· was the gentleman who had indicated in the post-meeting conversation that there had been too many people at the briefing 0 f ·Identification of Individuals who might Provide First-Hand Data on the NUMEC Diversion Situation The ongressional Staff Members asked several times who might be able to provide them with first-hand knowledge of what kind of· investigations were conducted in the past into lhe NUMEC diversion i ase In response to these ·seNiE iri _ -•a··rr rr •r•••·· C06419940 PPROVEDFOR RELEASE- CIA INFO DATE 25-Au -2015 I· -7- • questions Mr • Duckett recommended that the Committee Staff talk to·Mr George Murphy- farmer Staff Director of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy and Mr Richard Kennedy Commissioner of _the NRC g -Transportation for Nuclear Materials whfoh Might Have Been Diverted Mr Duckett was asked if he had any insights into how diverted nuclear materials could have been transported olit of the United States in the period prior to 1968 This produced the response that r Duckett had no first-hand knowle topic b 3 NSC 25X1 p 1 b 3 NatSecAct EO 13526 3 3 b 6 25Yrs C06419940 PPROVED FOR RELEASE - CIA INFO DATE 25-Au -2015 -8- -· - b 1 b 3 NatSecAct EO 13526 3 3 b 6 25Yrs 25X1 SEN nVE CRcf C06419940 PPROVEDFOR RELEASE- CIA INFO DATE 25-Au -2015 ' P- 1 b 3 NatSecAct Eq 13526 3 3 b 6 25Yrs SE ET S SITIVE -9- b 3 NSC 25X1 l • Other Nuclear Piversions -'L'he Congressional Staffers asked · any role from U -S Sources if CIA had played 25X1 Doc ett state at is was an item at p e had·discus sed with Mr J ichard Kennedy and h knew that it was a matter that had also been reviewed by Mr Helms or others b 1 b 3 NatSecAct EO 13526 3 3 b 6 25Yrs with Senator Baker Mr Shackley C06419940 PPROVED FOR RELEASE - CIA INFO DATE 25-Au -2015 'ti 1 b 3 NatSecAct EO ·1 5263 3 b 6 25Yrs -10- ' stated that the CIA records indicate that there was an excha ge of correspondence in March 1976 between Senator Baker and CIA on the NUMEC diversion Mr Shackley made the point however that the records which we had seen to date did not indicate that GIA had ·been in aµv wav involved -----------------------------_---25 1 25 1 b 1 b 3 NatSecAct EO 13526 3 3 b 6 25Y n CIA I s Capability to Currently Detect Nuclear Dtversions The Congressional Staffers asked if CIA currently had a capability to detect nuclear diversions from the United States to other countries Mr • Shackley by saying responded ----------- b 1 b 3 NatSecAct EO 13526 3 3 b 6 25Yrs 25X1 C06419940 PPROVEDFOR RELEASE- CIA INFO DATE 25-Au -2015 · b 1 'p 3 NatSecAct Ep 13526 3 3 b 6 25Yrs -- T r 11VE -11- b 1 b 3 -NatSecAct EO 13521 t b 6 25Yrs ·· 25 1 ----r··· Comment If is clear al he Cong essional Staffers·are lookingfor ways of developing safe-guards· on he nuclear diversion issut and may return to this question at a later da te for a clearer identification· of --------' _____ __ ·········· ····· ············ 25 1 I --· ···· t -'' ---- -- ------- ---- --- ------- Mr Duckett stated that he was Mr Shackley stated not aware of any such dialogue that he had not run across any material thus far in the files which would indicate that there had been a dialo e 1 this context Mr Shackley told the Congressional Staffers that reports concerning the availability of enriched uran um · were constantly appearing in one intelligence channel or another and as a result we would need more specifics in order to sort out'what particular report or' rumor they were referring to Co ent · In the post-meeting r e riew session on 2 Au ust ····················· b 3 NSC 25X1 15X1 b 1 b 3 NatSecAct EO 13526 3 3 b 6 25Yrs 1 SENSI b 3 NatSecAct 51 RET b 3 CIAAct EO 13526 3 3 b 6 25Yrs ' C06419940 PPROVED FOR RELEASE - CIA INFO DATE 25-Au -2015 - -E 't- 1 b NatSecAct E0 13526 3 3 b 6 25Yrs 7 1 1 ·2sx 4 Future Committee Actions The discussion outlined in parawhen Mr Duckett indicated that he had to proceed graph 3 terminated to another appointment • Mr Shackley then asked Mr Potter whether that there would be a need for any further follow qp dis· he envisioned CIA and Congressional ·staff Members or the Chairr na n cussion between of the Committee of the House Subcommittee on Energy and Power · Mr Potter responded by· saying that the Committee planned to open its public hearings on 8 August After that date Mr Potter thought it might be necessary for an Agency spokesman to brief Congressman members in a n off-the-record Dingell and one or two other Committee session concerning CIA 1 s insights into the NUMEC diversion issue It was left therefore that there was no fo rther action required by CIA in relation· to the House Subcommittee on Energy and Power until the latter took the initiative to recontact CIA 5 Comment The meeting on Z August served a useful purpose Staff Members relative in clearing the air with the two Congressional to CIA I s role in the N J'MEC diversion case · At the· end of the meeting one had the clear imP ression that Messrs Potter and Stockton understood that CIA' s role 25X1 b 3 NatSecAct b 1 EO 13526 3 3 b 6 25Yrs SENS iRET C06419940 PPROVEDFOR RELEASE- CIA INFO DATE 25-Au -2015 · r • · ·2pX1 capability ·rt was stressed throughout however that CIA d d not have any facts which would stand up in court which could be used l o •conclusivel· rove that there was linkaa diversio Tnel ongress1ona it understand · 6 The discussion with the Congressional Staffers was not under oath an no formal record was kept by the two gentlemen although Mr Stockton did take copious notes · b 1 b 3 Natse·cAct EO 13526 3 3 b 6 25Yrs Associate Theodore G Shackley L- -------················· Deputy Director for Opera ions Dist ion DC l - A QDCI I - ODO l - OLC 1 - C S IA I - SA D0 0 extract I I b 6 C06419941 PPROVED FOR RELEASE - CIA INFO DATE 25-Au -2015 ' h 1 b ' -3 NatSecf ct EO 1 6 25Yrn NUMEC 1 £ j £3 I ----------------- 25X1 I i ·I ' I I I I b 1 b 3 NatSecAct EO 13 26 3 3 b 6 25Yrs _ $ECBE'ti'SENSrrIVE ' t C06419941 PPROVED FOR RELEASE - CIA INFO DATE 25-Au -2015 b 1 b P NatSecAct 5X1 ·Eo13526 3 3 b 6 25Yrs I I· i i AEC Investigation· NUMECowned and operated a uranium processing facility at ·Apollo Pennsylvania · It first received material under lease arrangement in December 1957 and received its first in-December 1957 From the material as an AEC contractor start up through 31 December 1966 NUMECreceived 21 750 kg losses of of U- 35 and shipped 19 865 kg U-235 reporting Starting about 260 kg or about 1 2% of total receipts but in the opini9n about 1960 the AEC began a continuing of the Comptroller General of the United States ineffective campaign to get NUMEC to implement ade·quate control of the · material in its plant This matter came to a head in survey to November 1965 when the AEC made a detailed losses since start up and to attempt to determine total explain the unexpectedly high U -235 loss on the WANL contract Westinghouse The survey established the loss Of this from 1957 until 31 October 1965 as 178 kg U-235 total 84 2 kg was estimated by the survey team to have been lost through known loss mechanisms NOL and the remaining amount of 93 8 kg was categorized as MUF MUF is defined as usually the result of uncertainties in measurements ·unknown losses and undetected errors in records In 1964 a fire occurred in the vault containing nuclear materials at NUMEC which effectively destroyed records of the input and output of material The fire occurred during a strike when the plant was shut down The AEC report on the November 1965 survey presented the vie that while it could·not be stated I I I I I I I· 1 i I Sf CRET SENS fff 'f 2 I I C06419941 PPROVED FOR RELEASE - CIA INFO DATE 25-Au -2015 -SEGRET 5ENSi'flVfi ---- with certainty that diversion did not take place the survey team found no evidence to support the possibility of diversion The Comptroller General found that because of'the condit on of NUMEC'srecords they were unable to state an opinion on the disposition of the MUFbut had no reason to question the AEC conclusion with regard to diversion The Comptroller had been asked to investigate this situation by an alarmed Joint Committee of the Congress on Atomic Energy on 7 September 1966 The Comptroller General's report to the Congress stated Notwithstanding neither the AEC nor extensive reviews of NUMHC'soperations NUMEC have been able to identify with a high d_egree of certainty the specific causes of WANLmaterial loss I · i I I· II - SEORB'l' SEN µ 3 1