FBI Internal UAP Intelligence Routing Protocol, July 1949 (Form No. 64 Architecture, CC-150 ROUTINE Channel, Division Four Directory, TELEMETER Response, November 1964 Destruction Stamp)

Summary

Pages 17-24 of FBI 62-HQ-83894 Section 5 form a July 1949 routing-document cluster generated by a single civilian-sourced UAP intelligence case: the Jones/Winchell/Cuneo letter. The case content — Jones’s 1947 sighting, Cuneo’s call to Ladd, Hoover’s directive to locate Jones, the LA field office’s failure to find him — is documented in jones-winchell-cuneo-1947-1949 and cuneo-jones-winchell-followup-1949. This source page documents the routing machinery the case triggered: the five distinct document types produced by a single civilian-intermediary UAP intelligence referral in 1949, and what that machinery reveals about the FBI’s internal UAP coordination protocol.

The cluster contains a Standard Form No. 64 (analytical memo, Director-level), a CC-150 ROUTINE (operational field directive), a routing-slip accumulation page with six senior-official receipt stamps, the FBI Division Four internal telephone directory (an organizational snapshot of the 1949 domestic intelligence apparatus), and an URGENT TELEMETER (field-office response). Together they document the complete Bureau routing cycle for a civilian-sourced UAP-intelligence case initiated through political-intermediary channels: verbal intake → Form 64 analysis → Director directive → ROUTINE field tasking → TELEMETER negative result → multi-official secondary distribution.

The cluster also contains the fifth confirmed instance of the November 18, 1964 Bureau-wide records-destruction cull on page 17, extending the documented destruction pattern to Section 5 materials alongside Sections 2, 6, and 10.

What the Routing Cluster Documents

Page 21 — Standard Form No. 64 (Ladd to Director, July 9, 1949): Architecture of a Director-Level UAP Analytical Memo

The Form No. 64 is the Bureau’s standard analytical-memorandum vehicle at the Assistant-Director-to-Director level, used for intelligence summaries requiring Hoover’s decision or awareness. Page 21 is the Ladd→Director Form 64 on the Jones/Winchell referral, with the following structural features:

TO / FROM / DATE / SUBJECT header block: “TO: The Director / FROM: Mr. Ladd / DATE: July 9, 1949 / SUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS.” The FLYING SAUCERS subject line is the Bureau’s administrative category heading for the 62-HQ-83894 case file at this period — consistent across all 1949-1950 Director-level memos in this archive. The category had not yet shifted to “FLYING DISCS” or “UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT” (the Cabell directive’s September 1950 terminology).

Right-column routing-and-approval distribution list with check-boxes: Two checked boxes (Tolson and Ladd); others left unchecked. Checked = Director-approved for distribution; unchecked = FYI-only distribution. The distribution structure is a sequential approval record: Hoover’s initials or check marks on a Form 64 authorized each named official’s copy.

13-15 named officials on page 21’s distribution list (Tolson, Clegg, Glavin, Ladd, Nichols, Rosen, Tracy, Egan, Gurnea, Harbo, Mohr, Pennington, Quinn Tamm, Tele. Room, Nease, Holmes, Gandy). This 15-name list is smaller than the 17-name list generated by the subsequent CC-150 ROUTINE directive (page 17), which added E. A. Tamm, Olavin, Carson, and Hendon. The expansion from analytical-memo distribution to operational-directive distribution documents Hoover’s standard practice of widening institutional visibility as a case moved from analysis to active field tasking.

“DML:dhb” notation identifies the dictating officer (D. M. Ladd) and the stenographer by initials. Every Form 64 memo carried this dictation notation, indicating the memo was produced through the standard Secretary-dictation pipeline. Director-level UAP-intelligence analytical memos moved through the Bureau’s standard administrative channels — not exceptional documents in format, only in content.

RECORDED/INDEXED serial stamps: “RECORDED - 59 / INDEXED - 59 / 162-83894-195.” The “162” prefix indicates cross-filing in a related case file alongside the primary “62” series — the Bureau maintained parallel serial tracks for different oversight levels.

“3 AUG 19 1949” and “61 AUG 11 1949” stamps document secondary-office receipt dates 41 days after the July 9 original — consistent with Bureau administrative rhythms for ROUTINE-priority material where secondary review cycles run one month after primary distribution.

Handwritten annotation: “Walter Winchell” in the left margin identifies the political intermediary whose involvement triggered the Form 64 memo. The annotation is the only marginal identification of the referral channel on the analytical memo itself.

Page 17 — CC-150 ROUTINE (Hoover to SAC Los Angeles, July 12, 1949): The Operational Directive and Destruction Stamp

The CC-150 ROUTINE is the operational field directive that followed the Form 64 analytical memo:

“FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION / UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE / ROUTINE / JULY 12, 1949 / TO: COMMUNICATIONS SECTION / SAC, LOS ANGELES / […] DISCREETLY CHECK BACKGROUND OF JONES. THEREAFTER, INTERVIEW HIM FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING ANY FACTS IN HIS POSSESSION CONCERNING THE STATEMENTS SET OUT HEREIN. / HOOVER” — Section 5 page 17, CC-150 ROUTINE, July 12, 1949

“CC-150” is the document control number for the 150th carbon-copy communication in the relevant Communications Section sequence. “ROUTINE” is the communication priority classification — lower than URGENT or IMMEDIATE, directing the field office to act without expedited-response obligation. The Bureau chose ROUTINE for a Director-level personal-name directive, indicating that even Hoover’s personal field-office orders operated through the standard communication priority system unless he designated otherwise.

17-name distribution list on page 17: Tolson, E. A. Tamm, Clegg, Olavin, Ladd, Nichols, Egan, Rosen, Tracy, Carson, Gurnea, Harbo, Hendon, Pennington, Quinn, Nease, Miss Gandy. Four additional officials appear here vs. the page-21 Form 64 list: E. A. Tamm (Associate Director’s executive assistant), Olavin (administration), Carson (management), and Hendon (personnel). The administrative-layer addition at the operational-directive stage created a broader institutional accountability footprint for cases where the Director personally issued field directives.

“COPIES DESTROYED NOV 18 1964” — the destruction stamp in the upper right of page 17 is the fifth confirmed instance across this archive series of the November 18, 1964 Bureau-wide records-retention cull:

Section 2 page 52 (Twin Falls Hedstrom, pass 24): “COPIES DESTROYED 270 NOV 18 1964”
Section 2 page 177 (Section 2 extension, pass 24): “COPIES DESTROYED 270 NOV 18 1964”
Section 6/10 materials (Frank Scully URGENT teletype, pass 21): destruction-stamp cluster
Section 6 Kodiak ONI report (pass 22): “COPIES DESTROYED 270 NOV 23 1964” (five-day variant)
Section 5 page 17 (this case): November 18, 1964 — extends the confirmed cull to Section 5

The November 1964 cull operated across at least Sections 2, 5, 6, and 10 of the 62-HQ-83894 case file. The cull was Bureau-wide. Page 17 is a routine CC-150 ROUTINE communication from 1949 — not a sensitive substantive document — confirming that the November 1964 cull destroyed copies of standard administrative communications as well as substantive case materials.

Routing stamps on page 17: “RECEIVED READING ROOM JUL 12 4 30 PM ‘49” confirms the directive reached the Reading Room (internal distribution hub) on the same day it was issued. “RECEIVED JUL 18 12 31 PM ‘49” in a second stamp indicates a secondary-office receipt six days after issue — consistent with ROUTINE priority distribution speed for cross-country internal routing.

Page 22 — Routing Slip Accumulation (Multi-Official Receipt Stamps)

Page 22’s body text is illegible due to scan quality, but its margins preserve six sequential routing stamps documenting the Form 64 memo’s distribution cycle:

RECEIVED-LADD: F B I / Jul 11 11 17 AM ‘49 — Ladd’s own copy arrived two days after he wrote the memo
RECEIVED - FLETCHER: Jul 11 12 52 PM ‘49 — Fletcher received 95 minutes after Ladd
RECEIVED-TOLSON: ESPIONAGE / DEPT OF JUS[tice] / Jul 13 9 38 AM ‘49 — Tolson received four days after Director, with ESPIONAGE subject-routing designation
Jul 9 4 09 PM ‘49 — Director’s office stamp, same-day receipt (Director received Form 64 four hours after Ladd wrote it)
RECEIVED-N[illegible]: Aug 8 2 24 PM ‘49 — secondary review nearly a month later
RECEIVED - FLETCHER: Aug 7 25 PM ‘49 — second Fletcher receipt indicating case re-entered circulation after the July 18 negative LA reply

Distribution sequence with time gaps:

July 9 4:09 PM: Director received the Form 64 (same afternoon Ladd wrote it)
July 11 11:17 AM: Ladd’s file copy returned (two days)
July 11 12:52 PM: Fletcher received (same day as Ladd return)
July 13 9:38 AM: Tolson received (four days after Director)
August 7-8: Secondary Fletcher and N[illegible] review (month-long re-circulation after negative LA reply)

The month-long gap between primary distribution (July 9-13) and secondary review (August 7-8) corresponds to the period between Hoover’s directive (July 12) and the follow-up review after the LA negative reply (July 18). The August secondary circulation represents the case re-entering the distribution cycle for senior-official awareness after the failed field investigation.

“ESPIONAGE / DEPT OF JUS[tice]” on the Tolson routing stamp at July 13: this cross-subject-line designation indicates the Jones/Winchell UAP case was routed through the Bureau’s Espionage administrative infrastructure — either formally cross-filed under an Espionage case file or physically routed through the Espionage division’s mailroom. The administrative integration of UAP and Espionage routing paths in 1949 is documented in the stamp text.

Page 23 — FBI Division Four Internal Telephone Directory (1949)

Page 23 is a working-level internal telephone directory for FBI Division Four — the FBI’s domestic intelligence division — dated 1949. The directory names the full institutional roster of officials and functions that processed UAP intelligence through 1949:

Senior official extensions:

Official	Extension	Note
Director	5633	Hoover’s primary line
Mr. Tolson	5744	Associate Director
Mr. Ladd	5734	Assistant Director, primary UAP case handler
Mr. Clegg	5256
Mr. Glavin	5517
Mr. Harbo	7641
Mr. Fletcher	1742
Mr. Nichols	5640	Press relations
Mr. Rosen	5706
Mr. Tracy	4130 IB	Intelligence Branch physical suite
Mr. McGuire	5640	Same extension as Nichols
Miss Gandy	5633 (marked)	Hoover’s personal secretary, same line as Director
Mr. Logue	5263
Mr. Donohue	3710

Functional unit extensions:

Unit	Extension
Fugitive Desk	5720
Lab. Night Sup’r.	7619
Movement Section	5266
Leave Clerk	7623
Reading Room	5531
Mail Room	5533
Coding Unit	4642
Routing	7133
Teletype Unit (Room 5644)	Ext. 687 (handwritten annotation)

Key organizational findings from the directory:

Mr. Tracy at “4130 IB” — the IB designation indicates Tracy’s physical location was the Intelligence Branch suite (suite 4130). Tracy appears on more UAP-intelligence distribution lists than any non-Ladd official in this entire archive series. The IB location confirms Tracy was the Intelligence Branch officer-of-record for UAP case distribution — not an ad-hoc recipient but a standing IB-desk officer for the case category.

Miss Gandy at extension 5633 (same as Director) — confirms Helen Gandy operated as Hoover’s immediate gatekeeper and personal secretary, sharing his telephone line. Incoming communications to Hoover first reached Gandy. The frequency of Gandy’s appearance on UAP distribution lists reflects her role as the Director’s communications intermediary.

Teletype Unit at Extension 687 / Room 5644 (handwritten annotation added to the directory’s lower margin) — the direct access extension for the Bureau’s TELEMETER system. Field offices transmitting URGENT TELEMETER to the Director’s office reached Extension 687. The handwritten addition suggests the Teletype Unit’s extension was added after the directory was printed, either because the unit relocated or the extension was issued to a newly established suite.

The directory documents the full personnel and functional footprint of the FBI’s 1949 domestic intelligence apparatus. Alongside intelligence-tier officials (Ladd, Tracy, IB suite), the directory includes the Reading Room (5531), Mail Room (5533), Coding Unit (4642), and Routing (7133) — the administrative-support infrastructure that processed UAP intelligence alongside all other Division Four domestic intelligence case files. UAP cases moved through the same administrative pipeline as all Division Four domestic intelligence work.

Page 24 — URGENT TELEMETER (SAC Los Angeles to Director, July 18, 1949)

The field office’s reply to the CC-150 ROUTINE directive, transmitted six days later:

“FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION / U. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE / COMMUNICATIONS SECTION / JUL 18 1949 / TELEMETER / [Signature] 2244 / WASH 2 FROM LOS ANGELES 18 10-35 AM / DIRECTOR URGENT / PETER CAMERLON JONES, INFO. CONCERNING. REURTEL JULY EIGHTEEN. / EFFORTS TO IDENTIFY OR LOCATE JONES NEGATIVE. / HOOD / ACK PLS” — Section 5 page 24, URGENT TELEMETER from SAC Los Angeles, July 18, 1949

Communication protocol elements visible in the TELEMETER:

URGENT priority — SAC Hood elevated the reply priority above the ROUTINE priority of the original directive. Negative results on Director-level orders are reported at URGENT regardless of the original directive’s priority level.
“REURTEL JULY EIGHTEEN” — reference to “your teletype July Eighteenth” — the July 12 directive arrived at the Los Angeles office on July 18 (six days after issue), consistent with ROUTINE priority distribution time for cross-country teletype
“WASH 2 FROM LOS ANGELES 18 10-35 AM” — WASH 2 = Washington Communications Center copy 2; FROM LOS ANGELES 18 = LA field office, day 18; 10-35 AM = time of transmission
“2244” control number — the TELEMETER’s own communication control identifier, analogous to CC-150 on the outgoing directive
“ACK PLS” — “Acknowledge Please” — standard teletype acknowledgment request ensuring the Director’s office confirmed receipt of the negative result
“HOOD” — SAC R. B. Hood’s surname authentication on the TELEMETER, standard field-office sign-off for Director-addressed communications

The complete routing cycle visible across pages 17-24:

Cuneo phone call → Ladd (verbal intake, July 9)
Ladd → Director: Form No. 64 analytical memo (page 21, July 9)
Director → Communications Section → SAC Los Angeles: CC-150 ROUTINE (page 17, July 12)
Routing slip accumulation: multi-official distribution (page 22, July 9 – August 8)
SAC Los Angeles → Director: URGENT TELEMETER negative result (page 24, July 18)
Secondary re-circulation through senior officials (page 22 August stamps)

The five-document, six-stage routing cycle represents the Bureau’s complete operational loop for a Director-level civilian-sourced UAP-intelligence case in 1949.

Why This Matters

The Division Four telephone directory is the only in-archive organizational snapshot of the FBI’s 1949 domestic intelligence apparatus. No other page in this archive series has produced a named-and-numbered working directory of the officials and functions that processed UAP intelligence. The directory establishes Tracy’s physical location in the Intelligence Branch (IB suite 4130), Gandy’s co-location with the Director (5633), and the Teletype Unit’s location (Room 5644, Ext. 687). This is an institutional architecture document, not a case document — the only one of its kind in the archive.
The CC-150 ROUTINE / URGENT TELEMETER channel asymmetry documents the speed differential built into the Bureau’s communication infrastructure. The Director issued field directives at ROUTINE priority; field offices replied to negative results at URGENT priority. The asymmetry is an institutional design choice: slow for orders, fast for feedback. UAP-intelligence field tasking operated under this same asymmetry — optimized for rapid Director-level awareness of failed investigations.
The November 18, 1964 destruction stamp on page 17 extends the confirmed cull pattern to Section 5. Prior confirmed instances were in Sections 2, 6, and 10. Section 5 page 17 is a routine CC-150 ROUTINE from 1949 — the cull destroyed standard administrative communications, not only substantive case documents. The pattern across four sections confirms a Bureau-wide housekeeping event affecting the entire 62-HQ-83894 case file in November 1964.
The ESPIONAGE cross-routing stamp on Tolson’s copy (page 22) documents administrative integration of UAP and counterintelligence routing in 1949. The Jones/Winchell UAP case was physically routed through the Bureau’s Espionage administrative infrastructure when it reached Tolson. The administrative co-location of UAP and Espionage routing pathways is documented in primary-source form.
The 17 vs. 13 distribution list expansion documents Hoover’s institutional-visibility-widening practice as cases moved from analysis to action. Form 64 analytical memos distributed to ~13-15 officials (intelligence tier). CC-150 operational directives distributed to 17 (intelligence tier + administrative layer: Tamm, Olavin, Carson, Hendon). The administrative-layer addition at the operational-directive stage created a broader accountability footprint for cases where the Director personally issued field directives.
Mr. Tracy’s “4130 IB” designation confirms the Intelligence Branch as the standing administrative home for UAP case distribution. Tracy’s appearance on more UAP-intelligence distribution lists than any non-Ladd official in this archive series, combined with the IB-suite location marker, establishes that UAP case distribution was routed through a specific standing desk in the Intelligence Branch — not circulated ad-hoc to whichever officials happened to receive each case’s Form 64 memo.

Connections

jones-winchell-cuneo-1947-1949 — case content of the Jones UAP sighting (the case this routing cluster processed)
cuneo-jones-winchell-followup-1949 — the Bureau’s differential response and institutional-selectivity analysis; the routing machinery documented here produced the differential response
PURSUE full inventory
cabell-afoic-cc-1-multi-agency-protocol-september-1950 — Cabell’s September 1950 formalization of multi-agency UAP coordination; the July 1949 routing machinery documented here is the pre-formalization state of the FBI’s internal coordination infrastructure
air-defense-command-institutional-baseline-policy-february-1948 — February 1948 ADC policy establishing the military-UAP investigation baseline; the July 1949 Bureau routing machinery documented here is the civilian-intelligence-agency equivalent developed in parallel
project-grudge-vital-installations-1948-1949 — April 1949 G-2 Fourth Army’s in-channel request to interview Winchell refused via SAC Letter No. 38; the July 1949 Cuneo phone call generated the routing machinery documented here as the political-intermediary bypass of the refused in-channel request
danforth-illinois-instrument-examination-september-1947 — September 1947 artifact-vetting case also routed to 17 senior FBI officials including Tolson, Ladd, Tamm, Clegg, Nichols; identical distribution footprint across the 1947 and 1949 cases suggests a standing Director-level UAP-intelligence routing template

Open Questions

What does the ESPIONAGE cross-routing stamp on page 22 correspond to in the Bureau’s parallel case files? If the Jones/Winchell case was formally cross-indexed under an Espionage series file, that file would contain different materials than the 62-HQ-83894 flying-discs file and may not be included in PURSUE Release 01.
What is the complete November 18, 1964 destruction-stamp scope across the full 62-HQ-83894 case file? Confirmed instances now span Sections 2, 5, 6, and 10. Sections 3 and 4 have not been systematically checked for November 1964 destruction stamps. A complete destruction-stamp survey across all six sections would establish the full scope of the 1964 cull.
Does the “2244” TELEMETER control number on page 24 correspond to a Communications Section log? The Bureau’s Communications Section would have maintained a log of all outgoing and incoming TELEMETER communications by control number. If the CC-Section log survives, it would document the full volume of URGENT teletypes received at the Director’s office in July 1949 — providing a denominator for UAP-case-generated URGENT communications vs. total URGENT volume.
What other case files used the “4130 IB” Intelligence Branch desk extension? Tracking whether Tracy’s IB desk extension persisted across multiple years would establish the Intelligence Branch’s standing role in UAP case distribution as a durable institutional function, not a temporary assignment.

Quotes Worth Keeping

“EFFORTS TO IDENTIFY OR LOCATE JONES NEGATIVE. HOOD. ACK PLS.” — URGENT TELEMETER from SAC Los Angeles to Director, July 18, 1949 (Section 5 page 24). The field office’s response to Hoover’s personal CC-150 ROUTINE directive: the subject of a Director-level investigation order could not be found. The complete routing cycle is documented in five pages of the same Section 5 cluster.

“ROUTINE / JULY 12, 1949 / […] DISCREETLY CHECK BACKGROUND OF JONES. THEREAFTER, INTERVIEW HIM FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING ANY FACTS IN HIS POSSESSION CONCERNING THE STATEMENTS SET OUT HEREIN. / HOOVER” — CC-150 ROUTINE operational directive from Director Hoover, July 12, 1949 (Section 5 page 17). The Director’s personal authority issued through the standard CC-150 ROUTINE channel — not exceptional in format, only in whose name signed it.