This legislation, known as the COINTELPRO Full Disclosure Act, aims to ensure the comprehensive public disclosure of all government records related to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's covert and illegal counterintelligence program, COINTELPRO . It defines COINTELPRO as the program conducted from 1956 that involved surveilling, infiltrating, discrediting, and disrupting domestic organizations. The bill establishes a framework for releasing these historical documents, creating a central repository, and an oversight body. Within six months of enactment, each Government Office must fully disclose all COINTELPRO records in its possession, unless such disclosure would clearly and demonstrably cause harm , such as jeopardizing national security or revealing confidential sources. If full disclosure is withheld, the office must release segregable portions, substitute records, or summaries. Any record not fully disclosed initially is transmitted to the Review Board for further assessment. Furthermore, all COINTELPRO records not fully disclosed by the Review Board's termination date must be released to the public within 25 years of the Act's enactment, unless a specific exemption is recommended and agreed upon by the Archivist . This exemption process involves high-level review and potential override by the President or congressional leaders. The bill also requires federal entities to make reasonable efforts to notify victims or their next of kin seven days before a record's public disclosure. The Act mandates the Archivist to establish the COINTELPRO Records Collection at the National Archives within 60 days, which will include copies of all transmitted COINTELPRO records , previously disclosed records, and Review Board records. These records will be made available for public inspection and copying within 60 days of transmission and prioritized for digitization. Government offices are required to transmit electronic copies of all disclosable records to the Archivist within two years. An independent COINTELPRO Records Review Board is established within the executive branch, consisting of five members appointed by the President with Senate consent. These members must be distinguished individuals without prior involvement in COINTELPRO investigations, including at least one historian and one attorney. The Board's primary duty is to review government offices' determinations to partially disclose records and recommend full disclosure where appropriate. The Review Board is granted significant powers, including the authority to direct government offices to provide additional information, records, or testimony, and to subpoena private persons for relevant documents. It can also require written accounts for the destruction of any COINTELPRO records . The Board will have a Chief of Staff and other personnel, all of whom must be impartial citizens without prior involvement in COINTELPRO investigations. In its review process, the Board must direct full disclosure unless there is clear and convincing evidence that a record is not a COINTELPRO record or that disclosure would cause harm . For postponed records, the Board works to ensure the release of segregable parts or summaries and reports its actions and justifications to the Archivist . The Board is required to submit annual reports to Congress and the President detailing its activities, progress, and any challenges encountered. The bill also allows the Review Board to request the Attorney General to petition courts for the release of information relevant to COINTELPRO held under seal or grand jury secrecy, deeming such requests as a showing of particularized need. Congress expresses its sense that all government offices should cooperate fully with the Board. Additionally, the bill renames the J. Edgar Hoover Federal Building to the "Federal Bureau of Investigation Federal Building." This Act takes precedence over other laws that might otherwise prohibit the transmission or public disclosure of records, with the exception of tax return information and certain personnel and medical files that would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. It explicitly states that nothing in the Act limits existing rights under the Freedom of Information Act or precludes judicial review of its final actions.