This note continues my close look at the new versions of ARC records posted at NARA on 30 January 2026. It covers 16 new pdfs. These are in addition to the 12 pdfs discussed in part 2, and the 9 CIA pdfs covered in part 1.

These notes do not cover the new versions of the FBI records posted on January 30. These are a terrible mess, and I simply do not have the time (or the interest) to go through them right now.

An NSA re-release

NARA’s 30 January 2026 “release” included one pdf for an NSA record: 144-10001-10339. This record was actually released on 3 April 2025, but the record number was erroneously published as 144-10001-10399 instead of 144-10001-10339. The 2026 re-release corrects this error, publishing the same record again, but this time using the correct number.

Don’t treat this as a new record. It is not. Compare the 2025 399 and the 2026 339: they are the same document.

An SSCIA release

Unlike the NSA pseudo-release, one SSCIA [=Church Committee] record did release information in 2026.

The 2022 version of this record, ARC 157-10014-10187, held back the name of one NSA employee on page 2 of the document:

The 2026 version released the name:

Notice how this release shows us the bad redaction in 2022. Senger’s married name, Burns, was redacted in two sentences, and released in the third! Anyway, as we already knew in 2022, this information has nothing to do with the JFK assassination.

A JFK Library release

Redactions were also released in a JFK Library document in 2026.

The 2022 version of this record, ARC 176-10036-10206, had a number of redactions, almost all on page 12:

There was no pdf for this record in the 2025 releases, but we finally got an unredacted pdf on January 30:

The reason for the redactions is obvious here. The text provides an unvarnished look at U.S. diplomatic negotiations with France over NATO nuclear weapon strategy. The Franco-American conflict over whether France would have an independent nuclear deterrent capacity is well known. Have documents like this one been published in the past? No idea. That a dispute over publishing such material has been framed as a dispute over publishing JFK assassination records doesn’t make much sense to me. I’ll have more to say on this later.

LBJ Library records

Next come several records from the LBJ Library. Like the JFK Library example above, these records had some information still redacted in 2022 which was not released in 2025. The pdfs posted on Jan 30 released all of these remaining redactions. None of these records were relevant to the JFK assassination, and much of the information released this time was quite technical. Here are the redactions and releases, more or less complete.

177-10001-10033 (2022 / 2026). Here are the redactions and releases:

The redacted phrases turned out to be six letter groups beginning with the letter “Y”. These are known as DSSCS routing indicators. Routing indicators are sensitive information and have been one of the main sources of redactions in the ARC.

What do these indicators mean here? No idea. Some of these, such as “YEKAAH”, frequently appear in NSA releases from the 1960s.

Here their release add nothing to the content of the record, which is an NSA intercept of a message from Havana to the Cuban representatives at the UN. Which we already knew many years ago. Yawn.

177-10001-10437 (2022 / 2026). Here are the redactions and releases:

No danger of falling asleep here. Nothing to wake you up in the morning like a text discussing number of bombs and megaton yield per bomb. It is from 1963 of course, but still a strong shot of wake-up juice.

I had an earlier note on this jaw dropping record here. It was reviewed by a special DOD committee in 2022 and they certainly made it sound like these numbers were not going to come out any time in the next 50 years or so, yet here they are. A release that is definitely worth more commentary, but has received none, as far as I can tell.

177-10002-10100 (2022 / 2026). Here are the redactions and releases:

This is another NSA intercept. There were also some individual redactions on other pages that I will omit here. Once the redactions were released, it became clear that this was a cable from the European Community (later European Union) office in Washington DC to the mothership back in Brussels.

In addition to “Dorang” here, the other redactions were also names: “Van Dyk” and “Weil”. I feel moderately confident in identifying these people as Robert Dorang, Ted Van Dyk, and Gordon Weil. They were all American journalists/PR guys working for the Europeans at this point, who became advisors and/or publicists for the Democratic Party in later years.

There are a number of these NSA intercepts of European commercial and diplomatic cable traffic from immediately after JFK was assassinated, as the Euro community tried to figure out who the heck this Johnson fellow was.

None of this is relevant to the JFK assassination, and none of these records were part of the official government investigations of the assassination.

Instead, they were dug up by the ARRB, which as part of its mandate searched out records that could provide what the ARRB called “extended historical understanding” (EHU). Remember, the ARRB consisted of one lawyer and four historians, so there are hundreds, if not thousands, of records which were chosen for this reason.

177-10002-10104 (2022 / 2026). Here are the redactions and releases:

This record is a collection of NSA comm intercepts from December 3rd, 1963. Again, this was dug up by the ARRB as an EHU record. Rather than the raw reports, the collection gives an interesting example of how the reports were blended by analysts into an overview of current world events.

There were redactions on several other pages of the 2022 doc, all of which were released in 2026, readers can take a look for themselves.

177-10002-10106 (2022 / 2026). Here are the redactions and releases:

This is another NSA intercept of a cable from the European Community headquarters in Belgium to their office in D.C., sent by Robert Dorang to Leonard Tennyson, who was head of the D.C. office. This is another EHU record.

Rockefeller Commission records

2026 saw the release of a redaction in one record from the Rockefeller Commission; an interview of Clark Clifford. This was ARC
178-10002-10103 (2022 / 2026). Here are the redactions and releases:

Clifford denied any knowledge of the plans, but during the long, somewhat rambling interview, he mentioned certain sensitive matters, including Taiwan’s involvement in U2 flights and electronic monitoring of radio transmissions in mainland China.

Nothing earth shattering of course, but Clifford threw in the number of 300 monitors, and apparently that made it spicy enough to get a redaction. It stayed that way all through 2025. 2026 therefore represents the first release of this ancient historical tidbit.

HSCA records

In addition to the newly released typewriter ribbons we discussed in part 3 of this series, there were six other HSCA records posted at NARA on January 30.

The first three of these are 180-10110-10014, 180-10110-10016, and 180-10110-10017.

These records are duplicate transcripts of depositions given before the HSCA. The fact that there were duplicates of over a dozen transcripts caused major confusion at NARA. I have a long post on this snafu here.

To sum up, at least one copy of each transcript was released in full by 2025, but some duplicate transcripts were NOT released in full. These three records from January 30 are NARA’s attempt to fix the problem.

Have they finished releasing all the redactions in the duplicates? I believe the answer is no. However, I am not going to review this mess here. These three duplicate records are done. I will look at the other duplicates in another post.

The last three HSCA records released on January 30 are 180-10143-10099, 180-10145-10158, and 180-10145-10371.

These records are HSCA researcher notes on CIA records. These notes have been released many times, a tribute to the many redactions CIA requested in them. However, there is less here than meets the eye this time.

The record 180-10143-10099 is another pseudo-release, similar to what we saw in part 2 of this series. Two copies of this record were released in 2022: an old version with redactions, and a new version with new redactions. The record was therefore unredacted in 2022. The January 30 version has deleted the old version and includes only the unredacted version.

This same thing happened with several CIA records posted on January 30 as well. No idea why they are doing this.

The next record, ARC 180-10145-10158, was released with redactions in 2022, then released with NO redactions in June 2023. Now it is released again, also with no redactions, but with different page order, in January 2026. Color me puzzled. Anyway, nothing new in 2026.

Finally, ARC 180-10145-10371 is a lengthy set of notes by HSCA researcher Betsey Palmer, whose beautiful handwriting makes her notes a pleasure to read.

This record was also released in 2023, but comparing the 2023 release with the 2026 release is messy, because the pages are not in exactly the same order. In addition, the 2023 version had colored markings on it, which can sometimes make it hard to decipher the writing underneath. The 2026 version has no markings, so this is an improved version.

In addition, it turns out the 2023 version was missing a page, which was restored in 2026. Page 43 of the 2026 pdf does not appear in the 2023 version. So I guess this new release was necessary after all.

One record from INSCOM

This record is from the Army’s Investigative Reports Repository. It rubs salt into a wound by releasing yet another social security number. I refuse to put down the record number. Identity thieves will have to look it up themselves.

Two cents

So it turns out that for a few records we did get new information. These records were ARRB EHU records, which by definition are not relevant to the assassination. Interesting background, however, so I have no complaints.

As we have also seen, some of the January 30 pdfs were for records that had already been released in full. In some cases, the copies were better, in other cases, the records corrected book keeping errors, or were posted due to confusion at NARA.

For the records in this post, I knew all the ones that had real redactions, and wrote to NARA last April asking about them. I consider my letter on these records now answered, and have scratched them off my list.