Mr. Coleman.

(Commission Exhibit No. 951 was marked for identification and received in evidence.)

Mr. Chayes.

Yes.

Mr. Coleman.

Would you describe Commission Exhibit No. 951?

Mr. Chayes.

This is the standard operating notice which covers the categories, and if you look at them they relate each category to a ground of Potential disqualification.

Mr. Dulles.

As of what date does this read?

Mr. Coleman.

February 1962.

Mr. Chayes.

Now we have added by the Schwartz to Knight memorandum of recent date a defector category which differs slightly from the others in that in' all of the other categories something in the file already suggests that the person may be ineligible for a passport. The defector category would simply stimulate further investigation in the case of application by such a person, and would automatically trigger notification of the other security agencies.

Mr. Dulles.

How do you define the defector category, do you know?

Mr. Chayes.

I think we have the----

Mr. Dulles.

Would that have covered Oswald? That is what I am interested in.

Mr. Chayes.

Yes; well, it was in fact designed. to cover Oswald, so that----

Mr. Dulles.

It probably would have.

Mr. Chayes.

It would, but defector is not a statutory term or one that has real technical significance. I have said in my own discussions with people who have asked for guidance in administering this memorandum and others that it is not necessarily related to an attempted. renunciation of citizenship or anything else. It involves the kind of thing that if there were a war on would be treason. In other words, it involves something like aid and comfort to the enemy or attempted aid and, comfort to the enemy. The only thing is the enemy isn't technically an enemy because we are not at war. But that requires some judgment to decide which ones you put in and which ones you wouldn't.

Mr. Dulles.

There is a definition we could get though and put it in the record.

Mr. Chayes.

No, no.

Mr. Dulles.

There is no definition?

Mr. Chayes.

If you look at the Schwartz memorandum, it says that the Oswald case highlights the necessity of maintaining up-to-date lookout cards in the files of the Passport Office, "for persons who may have defected to Communist countries or areas or redefected. Subsequent to the Oswald incident, I requested the Department of Defense to furnish this office with identifying information on military personnel in this category. Information with respect to these military personnel has now been received from all three services and copies are attached.
"On the basis of the attached information, please bring up to date the lookout cards of the Passport Office."
And then it simply lists the names of the people that came over from the military.

Mr. Coleman.

Mr. Chayes, is the document we have marked Exhibit No. 951, the standard operating notice as of February 28, 1962?

Mr. Chayes.

Yes.

Mr. Coleman.

In the attachment in category K you have "Known or suspected Communists or subversives" as a category on which there should be a lookout card.

Mr. Chayes.

Yes.

Mr. Coleman.

Wouldn't Mr. Oswald. have fallen in that category, based upon the passport file?

Mr. Chayes.

I don't think so. There is nothing to indicate that he had ever been a member of the Communist Party. Maybe you would have regarded his Fair Play for Cuba activities as falling within the notion subversive. I have to say that I think K dates from an earlier period before the Kent case, in which we were denying passports very broadly to a category of people who might be called subversive. Rockwell Kent himself, Brehl, the other defendant, people as to whom there was no real membership information, but who had generally, what had been thought of as having subversive views or connections.