I began my inquiry on June 5, 1996, at the instruction of Director Freeh, after he learned that the White House had, in December 1993, sought background information relating to Billy Ray Dale, several months after he had been fired. The following day I learned from the White House that they were in possession of additional FBI records obtained in the same manner. I sent my deputy and an FBI Inspector to retrieve what turned out to be folders of background information relating to 333 individuals. By June 13, additional investigation revealed that the White House had improperly requested previous reports relating to a total of 407 individuals. All but two of these files are now again in the possession of the FBI.

It now appears that the requests relating to these 400 plus individuals were part of a larger series, comprised of at least 480 requests submitted to the FBI in nearly perfect alphabetical order between December 6, 1993 and February 3, 1994. These requests span the alphabet from Aa to Go; each sought copies of previous reports; and each provided as its justification, the single word, "access." No questions were raised by the FBI about these requests -- although the unusual volume of this type of request was noted -- and they were processed routinely by the personnel of the executive agencies subunit of the Information Resources Division of the FBI -- consistent with the guidelines that existed at the time.

As I sought an explanation for these actions, I discovered that the system had been in place through every FBI Director, essentially unchanged since the Johnson administration, and was designed to maximize speed and responsiveness. As a consequence, the FBI processed all facially valid White House requests without reflection. Even though, as I found, the FBI had acted in compliance with the Privacy Act, we had clearly failed to accord adequate weight to the protection of privacy. Over time, a tradition of considerable deference to the White House had developed, and questions were rarely asked.

It should not be forgotten that the provision of background information to the White House and other executive agencies is an integral component of the federal employment and security clearance systems. Carefully investigated and accurately reported information is essential for making determinations regarding a person's suitability and trustworthiness for employment or access. The FBI personnel who process the requests for this information perform a valuable and necessary service. Nothing in my inquiry suggested any failing on the part of these employees.

As to their supervisors, however, I reached a different conclusion. Although I found no intentional misconduct, I found a complete abdication of management responsibility at the level of the unit chief, and the executive level management as well. A policy of benign neglect cannot be tolerated in an area as sensitive as the dissemination of information from FBI files. Close and active oversight is an essential prerequisite to the fulfillment of our obligations to safeguard the information in our custody. Director Freeh has made it clear that he will tolerate nothing less.

It is incumbent upon all of us involved in this process -- at the FBI, the White House, and elsewhere in government -- to achieve the proper balance between the very real and significant needs of the government for the information contained in our files and our profound obligation to ensure that the information only be disseminated in appropriate and fully justified circumstances. In an effort to ensure that this balance is better achieved, Director Freeh implemented a series of procedural reforms and redundant safeguards last week which will prevent negligent or improper incursions into our files and preclude any such wholesale invasion of privacy from recurring:

First, in an effort coordinated with the White House Counsel's Office, which oversees the White House Office of Personnel Security, we redesigned the manner in which White House requests for information from FBI files must be made, to require:

1. either the consent of the person whose files are being reviewed, or a letter from the counsel to the president through the Deputy Attorney General to the FBI General Counsel explaining in writing why such consent cannot be obtained or should not be sought in the circumstances;
2. that all requests reflect the actual signatures of both the requesting official and of an attorney in the counsel's office, who will have reviewed and approved the request;
3. considerably greater specificity regarding the reason for the request; and
4. that a copy of all White House requests for information be provided to the FBI Office of the General counsel for review.

Nine other changes made by Director Freeh were approved by the Deputy Attorney General, all designed to protect against improper disclosures.

Finally, Director Freeh has instructed the FBI's Inspection Division to routinely audit the entire process to independently ensure absolute compliance with these new requirements.

A more detailed explanation is reflected in a memorandum approved by the Deputy Attorney General that has been provided to the committee and submitted for the record.

It should be emphasized that the inquiry I conducted between June 5 and June 14 was limited to an examination of the actions of FBI personnel. In deference to the wishes of the Independent Counsel, who was then conducting an inquiry, we did not interview any White House personnel involved either in the request for background information generally or in the specific series of requests which occasioned my inquiry. Accordingly, neither I nor Director Freeh has reached any conclusion about the actions or motivations of any White House employee.

On June 18, 1996, the Independent Counsel's Office informed the Attorney General that it does not believe it has jurisdiction to investigate further the circumstances surrounding the acquisition of information from FBI background files by the White House. This morning, the Attorney General announced that she has concluded that it would constitute a conflict of interest for the FBI and the Department of Justice to conduct any further inquiry into this matter. Accordingly, the Attorney General has asked the court to refer this matter to Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr.