Epstein Data Wiki

The Justice Department's Handling of Congressional Epstein Correspondence

Properties2
tagstopic, department-of-justice, executive-secretariat, congress, office-of-professional-responsibility, fbi, correspondence-control
aliasesCongressional oversight of the Epstein case, DOJ Executive Secretariat Epstein correspondence, Congressional Epstein letters

25 min read

The instrumentDepartment of Justice Executive Secretariat control sheet (to 2020) and eCATS summary sheet (2025): one page per incoming letter recording the addressee, a workflow number, a due date, an action component, an action requested, an information list and a running comments log12
Letters in the releaseEleven work packages of mail type “Congressional Priority” about Epstein, December 2018 to July 2025, surviving as fifteen printings of control sheets31456789101112213141516
Components that received one for actionThe Office of Legislative Affairs (five), the Office of Professional Responsibility (three), the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (two, one of them later reassigned), and the Justice Management Division’s ethics office (one)3146789101112215
Component that never received oneThe Office of the Inspector General, which appears only on an information list, on the one sheet whose letter asked that the Inspector General be given the investigation11
Due datesOn every sheet whose letter states its own deadline, the Department’s internal due date falls after that deadline: by 13 days in 2018, 9 and 19 days in July 2019, and 110 days in 20251892
The FBI’s standing answerNine referrals in this run carry the identical instruction “FOR INFORMATION ONLY. IT DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY FBI ACTION,” each with its own Bureau record number and distribution list171819202122232425
The exceptionOn 8 April 2025 the Bureau’s Executive Secretariat named an action office, a signature level and a due date for a letter from victims’ counsel — the only assignment of that shape in this material26

Between December 2018 and July 2025 the Justice Department’s Executive Secretariat logged eleven pieces of congressional correspondence about Jeffrey Epstein, gave each a workflow number, sent it to a named component with a named action, and set a date by which that action was due. Fifteen printings of those control sheets are in the release, together with nine Federal Bureau of Investigation referrals of the same letters and one Bureau assignment that is not a referral at all.312326 This page reports what the Department did with the letters, not what the letters argued. The two are recorded separately on the same page: an addressee line, which says who the member of Congress wrote to, and an action component line, which says which part of the Department was then made responsible. They frequently differ, and reading the first as though it were the second produces a false account of the routing.179

What a control sheet records, and the trap in reading one

The sheet is a single page. The upper block carries the date of the document, the date received, a workflow identifier, a due date, the sender, an addressee field headed TO:, and a mail type. The lower block is headed ACTION COMPONENT & ACTION REQUESTED and carries the component made responsible, the action demanded of it in one standard phrase, an INFO COMPONENT list of components copied for information, and a dated COMMENTS log.3 On one sheet in the set the label and value columns sit on the same lines rather than in two stacks, which settles the field structure beyond argument: TO: OPR and ACTION COMPONENT: OLA appear on the same document, in different places, meaning different things.9

Two standard action phrases run through the set. “Prepare response for AAG/OLA signature” makes the component the drafter of a reply to be signed by the Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs. “For appropriate handling. Advise ES of any action taken” transfers the matter without requiring a reply at all.315 The distinction is a substantive one about what the Department has decided the letter needs, and it is recorded nowhere else.

Where the letters went

Senator Ben Sasse wrote twice on 3 December 2018, and the two letters were logged as separate work packages the following day. The letter addressed to the Office of Professional Responsibility, asking it to open an investigation into possible misconduct by Department attorneys, went to that office as the action component with the instruction to prepare a response for the legislative-affairs signature.3 The letter addressed to the Criminal Division, asking that the senator’s team be briefed on the Department’s decision-making, did not go to the Criminal Division: it was assigned to the Executive Office for United States Attorneys “for drafting.”1 The Criminal Division appears on that sheet twice, once as the addressee and once on the information list, and never as the office responsible for answering.1

That pattern holds. Senators Patty Murray and Tim Kaine wrote to the Office of Professional Responsibility on 12 April 2019 asking it to publish its findings; the sheet routes it to that office, with an information copy to the Deputy Attorney General.6 Senator Kamala Harris wrote to the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General on 9 July 2019 asking them both to recuse themselves; the sheet records the addressee as “AG & DAG” and the action component as JMD, with the comment “Per OLA, assign to JMD/Ethics.”7 A request that two named officials disqualify themselves was made the responsibility of the Department’s ethics staff, and the sheet records no step above that.7

Elijah Cummings and Jamie Raskin, whom the sheet’s subject line names as chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and chairman of its Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, wrote with three other members to the Office of Professional Responsibility on 10 July 2019 requesting a briefing on its Epstein review. The sheet’s addressee is OPR; the action component is the Office of Legislative Affairs, “For appropriate handling.”9 Representative Karen Bass and eleven other members wrote to the Deputy Attorney General on 11 July 2019 asking for a briefing and documents; that too went to legislative affairs for appropriate handling.8 Sasse’s letter of 10 August 2019, written the day Epstein was found dead and asking four numbered questions about the custody, went to legislative affairs on the same terms, with the Bureau of Prisons and the FBI on the information list only.10

Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz and five other members wrote on 29 August 2019 asking the Department to let the Inspector General conduct an independent investigation. The sheet routes it to legislative affairs for appropriate handling and places the Office of the Inspector General on the information list.11 On no sheet in this set is the Inspector General an action component.

Two letters were assigned to a component with a stake in the answer. Sasse’s letter of 25 February 2019, urging the Department to reopen the non-prosecution agreement after the Crime Victims’ Rights Act ruling, was assigned to the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, the component that supervises the office that made the agreement.4 Sasse’s letter of 21 February 2020, urging the Office of Professional Responsibility to finish and asking the Department to waive privilege so that the former Assistant United States Attorney who had led the Florida matter could testify, was assigned to that same office, which was the subject of the complaint about delay.12 That office published its report on the Florida prosecution in November 2020.27

Senator Richard Durbin’s letter of 18 July 2025 about the unsigned Department and FBI memorandum was logged in the successor system as work package ECATS-2025-398054 and assigned to the Office of Legislative Affairs “for Appropriate Handling.”2 Pam Bondi carries that letter and the Bureau’s referral of it.

The due dates

Where a letter states its own deadline, the Department’s internal date is later. Sasse asked for an answer no later than 7 December 2018; the sheet for the briefing request sets a due date of 20 December 2018, and the sheet for the companion letter to the Office of Professional Responsibility carries no due date at all.13 The Oversight Committee asked for a briefing by 17 July 2019; the sheet, assigned on 19 July, sets 5 August.9 The House Judiciary members asked for a briefing and documents by 24 July 2019; the sheet sets 2 August.8 Durbin asked for material no later than 1 August 2025; the sheet’s step due date is 19 November 2025, and both the “Requested Due Date” and “Required Due Date” fields are blank, so the senator’s own deadline was not entered into the field the system provides for it.2 The same sheet records the package as not sensitive, not classified, not expedited and not an SLO priority.2

One workflow, printed twice

The Department’s own file on Sasse’s December 2018 briefing request survives in two printings of the same control sheet, made nine and a half months apart, and the pair is the only place in this congressional material where a routing decision can be watched changing.

The first, printed 6 December 2018, shows a due date of 20 December 2018, an action component of EOUSA, the action “Prepare response for AAG/OLA signature,” and one comment line, recording the assignment on the instruction of a named legislative-affairs official: “12/06/2018: Per OLA ([redacted]), assign to EOUSA for drafting.”1

The second, printed 24 September 2019, shows the same workflow number, the same addressee and the same subject, and then no due date, an action component of OLA, and the action “For appropriate handling. Advise ES of any action taken.”15 Its comments field carries five dated lines. On 10 April 2019 the matter was taken off the Executive Office for United States Attorneys and reassigned to legislative affairs “for handling.”15 On 21 August 2019, eleven days after Epstein was found dead, legislative affairs recorded “no response necessary.”15 On 24 September 2019 the decision was undone: “Per OLA, reopen WF for OLA to respond - see attached email.”15 On 15 October 2019 the log records “OLA replied by ltr dtd 10/07/19.”15

A briefing requested for 7 December 2018 and formally due on 20 December 2018 was answered by a letter dated 7 October 2019, after being moved between two components, closed as needing no answer, and reopened.115 The companion letter of the same day travelled the opposite way: the Office of Professional Responsibility replied by letter of 14 December 2018, and the log records that legislative affairs approved changing the signature level so that office signed the reply rather than legislative affairs.3

The Bureau’s standing answer

The Department copies the FBI on the information list of most of these sheets, and the Bureau’s own Office of the Executive Secretariat then circulates the letter internally. Nine such referrals are in this run, one for each of nine workflows, and every one carries the same two sentences: the correspondence is referred “FOR INFORMATION ONLY. IT DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY FBI ACTION; however, it is being referred to you for your information in the event you may be contacted by the DOJ entity tasked with handling the response,” followed by a note that a field division receiving it “is not being tasked with any action” and is “being provided a courtesy copy only.”2317 Each carries a Bureau record number, a distribution list of headquarters divisions and two field offices, and blank “Current action” and “Date Due” fields.23

The Bureau logs that decision as work. On the referral of the House Judiciary members’ letter the record reads: “Current action : FOR INFORMATION ONLY (Responsibility of: Executive, Secretariat, Due 07/22/2019 at 9:56 AM (Overdue 1 hour, 27 minutes)).”21 Deciding that nothing need be done was itself a task with a deadline, and that task was recorded as overdue.

The Bureau was not always on the list. The two December 2018 sheets carry no FBI entry in the information component, and no referral of either workflow is among the referrals in the release; the FBI first appears on the sheet assigned on 1 March 2019 and on every congressional sheet after it.31416

One document in the same run is not a referral. On 8 April 2025 the Bureau’s Executive Secretariat forwarded a letter from counsel for Epstein’s victims, the letter Pam Bondi reports, under the heading “ACTION OFFICE: IMD,” with a Sentinel due date of 2 May 2025 and the instruction that “[t]he above division, designated as the action office, is assigned the attached correspondence for preparation of a response over the signature of YOUR APPROPRIATE DIVISION OFFICIAL by the due date shown below.”26 The Bureau can assign an action office, a signature level and a deadline. On the nine congressional referrals in this run it did none of those things.

What the sheets do not record

A missing sheet. The Bureau’s referral of 18 July 2019, record 19/DO/2652, covers workflow 4293976, a further letter about the Office of Professional Responsibility’s investigation which the referral cross-references on its face to the Murray and Kaine workflow.20 No control sheet for that workflow is in the release. Every other congressional workflow referred to the Bureau has one.20

An empty comments field. The sheet for the Oversight Committee’s briefing request carries no comment line at all, so the record shows the assignment to legislative affairs and nothing thereafter.9

No contested assignment. The comments field is capable of recording a component refusing work: on a sheet in the same system, about the disposal of Epstein’s property and sent by an auction house rather than by Congress, the Executive Secretariat wrote “09/05/2019: Neither CRM, BOP nor EOUSA will accept assignment of this WF. Forwarded to for ODAG assignment guidance,” and the matter went to the Deputy Attorney General’s office for a decision five days later.28 Nothing of that kind appears on any of the eleven congressional sheets.

A due date that may not be the first one. A step due date on an eCATS sheet is the current step’s date, not necessarily the original. A work package outside this set, from state legislators and logged as “VIP Correspondence” rather than “Congressional Priority,” survives in two printings: the first, of 11 August 2025, names the Office of Information Policy as the action component with a step due date of 10 September 2025; the second records that office declining, in the words “Per OIP, not an OIP matter. See enclosed email. WP reassigned to FBI”, names the FBI, and carries a step due date of 5 November 2025.2930 Because only one printing of the Durbin sheet is in the release, its step due date of 19 November 2025 cannot be read as the date first set.2

Correspondence that never reached the Executive Secretariat. A letter of 13 August 2019 from Representative Nydia Velázquez about the Metropolitan Correctional Center was addressed to the Inspector General and to the FBI Director rather than to the Department, and travelled through the Bureau’s Office of Congressional Affairs as a “TRIM entry.”31 It has no control sheet, no workflow number and no due date, because the system this page describes is the system for mail sent to the Department’s leadership.31

The Department’s own summary can be wrong. The sheet for the February 2020 letter summarises it as concerning a man “found dead by apparent suicide while in federal custody in April.”12 The letter says August, which is correct.32 The error is on the control sheet at image level, not in the machine reading of it, and it was carried forward into the Bureau’s referral of the same letter.1225

The same page, redacted three ways

Three of these sheets were produced more than once, and the copies do not agree about what may be shown. This is a matter for document redaction integrity rather than for the routing, but it is visible only because the Department released the duplicates.

The control sheet for the December 2018 letter to the Office of Professional Responsibility appears three times. On one copy a legislative-affairs official’s surname is printed in the clear in the comment recording the signature-level change, and the Executive Secretariat point-of-contact line is a solid black box.3 On a second copy that surname is boxed and the point-of-contact line is boxed.13 On a third the surname is boxed but the point of contact’s name is printed in the clear, with only the telephone number covered.14 Each copy conceals something another copy shows. The pair of printings of the companion sheet does the same: the copy of 6 December 2018 prints a legislative-affairs official’s surname in the comment recording the original assignment, and the reprint of 24 September 2019 covers it.115

The Murray and Kaine package appears twice, and the two copies exchange redactions in both directions across the same five pages. The control sheet of one prints the point of contact’s name where the other boxes it.56 The letter itself, on page 2, boxes the name of the official it is addressed to in one copy and prints it in the other, both copies printing his office and title.56 On page 5 one copy boxes a Senate staff telephone number in a signature block and the other prints it.56 The value of that number is not reproduced here.

Coverage

Every document cited on this page is a government record in the release. All fifteen control-sheet printings, four of the nine FBI referrals, the Bureau’s 2025 action assignment, the three non-congressional comparison sheets, the Office of Professional Responsibility report’s title page and the first page of the Velazquez transmittal were read at the page image; the remaining five referrals, and the enclosed Velazquez letter, were read from the text layer only. The five referrals are cited for their standing instruction and their record and workflow numbers, which the four image-checked copies confirm are printed identically on every one.

Footnotes

  1. Executive Secretariat control sheet, workflow 4167070, date of document 12/3/2018, received 12/4/2018, due date 12/20/2018, printed 12/06/2018: TO “CRM”; action component “EOUSA”; “Prepare response for AAG/OLA signature.”; info component “OAG, ODAG, CRM, OLA, OPR”; comments “12/06/2018: Per OLA ([redacted]), assign to EOUSA for drafting.” Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175147 p.6. The official’s surname is withheld here. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9 ↩10 ↩11 ↩12 ↩13

  2. U.S. Department of Justice, Executive Secretariat, eCATS summary sheet, work package ECATS-2025-398054, document date 7/18/2025, received 7/18/2025: work package status “Active”; requested due date and required due date both blank; step due date 11/19/2025; “SLO Priority: No”; “Sensitive? No”; “Classified? No”; “Expedited? No”; To “AG, Bondi, CC indicated for”; mail type “Congressional Priority (Controlled)”; service code “Appropriate Handling”; current step “Action Component & Action Requested / OLA , OLA for Appropriate Handling(Assignment)”; info component OAG, ODAG, OASG, FBI, OIP; comments “07/18/2025: Per OLA, assign to OLA ([redacted]).” The description records that the letter “requests listed information and materials NLT 08/01/2025.” Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00173355 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8

  3. U.S. Department of Justice, Executive Secretariat, control sheet, workflow 4167042, date of document 12/3/2018, printed 12/06/2018: TO “OPR”; action component “OPR”; “Prepare response for AAG/OLA signature.”; due date blank; comments “12/06/2018: Per OLA, assign to OPR.”, “12/21/2018: OPR replied by ltr dtd 12/14/18. (OLA [redacted] approved signature level change from OLA to OPR). cc: Chmn files.” and “02/06/2019: OLA submitted supplemental response ltr dtd 02/06/19.” Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175147 p.5. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9 ↩10

  4. Executive Secretariat control sheet, workflow 4212486, date of document 2/25/2019, received 2/28/2019, due date 3/15/2019: TO “AG”; action component “EOUSA”; “Prepare response for AAG/OLA signature.”; info component “OAG, ODAG, CRM, FBI, OLA, OPR”; comments “03/01/2019: Per OLA, assign to EOUSA.” Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175147 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  5. Executive Secretariat control sheet and enclosures, workflow 4241026, date of document 4/12/2019, received 4/15/2019, due date 4/30/2019: TO “OPR”; action component “OPR”; “Prepare response for AAG/OLA signature.” This copy covers the addressee’s name in the letter and a field in the covering email’s signature block, and prints the Executive Secretariat point of contact’s name on the control sheet. Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175153 pp.1, 2, 5. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  6. The second copy of the same five-page package for workflow 4241026, carrying the same routing fields and covering the opposite set of fields, so that what one copy withholds the other does not. Comments: “04/15/2019: Per OLA [redacted], assign to OPR w/ info copy to ODAG.” Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175160 pp.1, 2, 5. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6

  7. Executive Secretariat control sheet, workflow 4293737, date of document 7/9/2019, received 7/12/2019, due date 7/26/2019: TO “AG & DAG”; action component “JMD”; “Prepare response for AAG/OLA signature.”; info component “OAG, ODAG, CRM, EOUSA, FBI, OLA, OPR”; comments “07/12/2019: Per OLA ([redacted]), assign to JMD/Ethics.” Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175169 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  8. Executive Secretariat control sheet, workflow 4297700, date of document 7/11/2019, received 7/18/2019, due date 8/2/2019: TO “DAG”; action component “OLA”; “For appropriate handling. Advise ES of any action taken.”; the subject records that the members “request a briefing and any relevant documents by 07/24/2019” and that the letter was “also signed by 11 other MCs”; comments “07/18/2019: Per OLA [redacted], assign to OLA.” Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175186 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  9. Executive Secretariat control sheet, workflow 4298374, date of document 7/10/2019, received 7/19/2019, due date 8/5/2019: TO “OPR”; action component “OLA”; “For appropriate handling. Advise ES of any action taken.”; info component “OAG, ODAG, CRM, EOUSA, FBI, OPR”; the subject records that “[t]he Comte requests a briefing from OPR on its review of the Epstein matter by 07/17/2019”; comments field empty. This is the sheet whose labels and values print on the same lines. Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175178 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8

  10. Executive Secretariat control sheet, workflow 4313945, date of document 8/10/2019, received 8/12/2019, due date 8/27/2019: TO “AG”; action component “OLA”; “For appropriate handling. Advise ES of any action taken.”; info component “OAG, ODAG, BOP, FBI”. The workflow number and the entry “FBI” are marked with a yellow highlighter on this copy. Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175125 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  11. Executive Secretariat control sheet, workflow 4325153, date of document 8/29/2019, received 9/4/2019, due date 9/19/2019: TO “AG (cc indicated for OIG)”; action component “OLA”; “For appropriate handling. Advise ES of any action taken.”; info component “OAG, ODAG, CRM, EOUSA, FBI, OIG, OPR”; the subject records the letter as “[u]rging DOJ to allow the Inspector General to conduct an independent and comprehensive investigation” and as “also signed by 5 other MCs.” Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175131 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  12. Executive Secretariat control sheet, workflow 4392040, date of document 2/21/2020, received 2/21/2020, due date 3/10/2020: TO “AG”; action component “OPR”; “Prepare response for AAG/OLA signature.”; info component “OAG, ODAG, BOP, CRM, EOUSA, FBI, JMD, OIG, OLA”; comments “02/25/2020: Per OLA, assign to OPR.” The subject block describes Epstein as “found dead by apparent suicide while in federal custody in April.” Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175139 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  13. The same control sheet for workflow 4167042 as printed in the February 2020 file, with the legislative-affairs surname covered. Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175139 p.6. ↩ ↩2

  14. The same control sheet for workflow 4167042 as printed in the July 2019 file, with the legislative-affairs surname covered and the Executive Secretariat point of contact’s name in the clear. Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175169 p.7. ↩ ↩2

  15. The same workflow 4167070 reprinted 24 September 2019: due date blank; action component “OLA”; “For appropriate handling. Advise ES of any action taken.”; file code “CHMN FILE: SASSE”; comments, latest first, “10/15/2019: OLA replied by ltr dtd 10/07/19. cc: CHMN files.”, “09/24/2019: Per OLA, reopen WF for OLA to respond - see attached email.”, “08/21/2019: Per OLA [redacted], no response necessary. cc: CHMN files.”, “04/10/2019: Per EOUSA [redacted] reassign to OLA [redacted] for handling.” and “12/06/2018: Per OLA [redacted], assign to EOUSA for drafting.” Read at the image; the text layer of this page separates the left and right halves of every comment line and misorders them, so it cannot be read literally. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175139 p.5. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9 ↩10

  16. The eleven work packages are 4167042, 4167070, 4212486, 4241026, 4293737, 4297700, 4298374, 4313945, 4325153, 4392040 and ECATS-2025-398054. A full-text search of the release for the mail type “Congressional Priority” returns twenty-four pages, all of them within the run of control sheets and referrals cited on this page, https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175123 to https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175192, plus https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00173355 ↩ ↩2

  17. FBI referral, record 19/DO/632, covering workflow 4212486, carrying the same instruction verbatim and the same blank “Current action” and “Date Due” fields. Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175145 p.2. ↩ ↩2

  18. FBI referral, record 19/DO/1400, covering workflow 4241026, carrying the same instruction. Read from the text layer. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175158 p.2. ↩

  19. FBI referral, record 19/DO/2591, covering workflow 4293737, carrying the same instruction. Read from the text layer. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175167 p.2. ↩

  20. FBI referral, record 19/DO/2652, covering workflow 4293976, carrying the same instruction, timestamped “Thursday, July 18, 2019”, and cross-referenced in its notes field: “See WF 4241026 and other related corres in ECMS.” No Executive Secretariat control sheet for workflow 4293976 is in the release. A scan of every page in the corpus carrying the words “EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT” returns twenty-three control sheets and eCATS summary sheets in all, fifteen of them the congressional printings cited on this page, and none of them this workflow; a search for the number itself returns this referral and no other page. Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175190 p.2. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  21. FBI referral, record 19/DO/2690, covering workflow 4297700: “Current action : FOR INFORMATION ONLY (Responsibility of: Executive, Secretariat, Due 07/22/2019 at 9:56 AM (Overdue 1 hour, 27 minutes)).” Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175184 p.2. ↩ ↩2

  22. FBI referral, record 19/DO/2714, covering workflow 4298374, carrying the same instruction. Read from the text layer. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175176 p.2. ↩

  23. FBI Office of the Executive Secretariat referral, record 19/DO/3105, covering workflow 4313945: “Attached is correspondence referred to the FBI by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Executive Secretariat, FOR INFORMATION ONLY. IT DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY FBI ACTION; however, it is being referred to you for your information in the event you may be contacted by the DOJ entity tasked with handling the response,” with “Current action :” and “Date Due :” both blank. Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175123 p.2. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  24. FBI referral, record 19/DO/3360, covering workflow 4325153, carrying the same instruction. Read from the text layer. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175129 p.2. ↩

  25. FBI referral, record 20/DO/579, covering workflow 4392040, carrying the same instruction and repeating the Department’s summary of the letter. Read from the text layer. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175136 p.2. ↩ ↩2

  26. FBI Office of the Executive Secretariat, assignment of DOJ ExecSec work package 25-357511, April 8, 2025: “ACTION OFFICE: IMD”, “SENTINEL DUE DATE: 05/02/2025”, and “The above division, designated as the action office, is assigned the attached correspondence for preparation of a response over the signature of YOUR APPROPRIATE DIVISION OFFICIAL by the due date shown below.” Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175192 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  27. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Professional Responsibility, “Investigation into the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida’s Resolution of Its 2006-2008 Federal Criminal Investigation of Jeffrey Epstein and Its Interactions with Victims during the Investigation,” November 2020, title page. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02847284 p.1. ↩

  28. Executive Secretariat control sheet, workflow 4319870, date of document 8/13/2019, received 8/21/2019, due date 9/24/2019, mail type “General Mail”, from the president of an auction house: action component “EOUSA”; comments “09/10/2019: Per ODAG, assign to EOUSA-SDNY ([redacted]).” and “09/05/2019: Neither CRM, BOP nor EOUSA will accept assignment of this WF. Forwarded to for ODAG assignment guidance.” Not congressional correspondence; cited here only for what the comments field is capable of recording. Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00032555 ↩

  29. eCATS summary sheet, work package ECATS-2025-404761, document date 7/29/2025, received 8/11/2025, mail type “VIP Correspondence (Controlled)”, sub mail type “State & Local Government”: current step “OIP , Component for Action(Assignment)”; step due date 9/10/2025; comments “08/11/2025: OIP to draft and sign response w/ OLA & SLO review and clearance prior to dispatch.” Not congressional correspondence; cited here only to show that a step due date can be reset. Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00172482 p.1. ↩

  30. The second printing of work package ECATS-2025-404761: current step “FBI, Component for Action(Assignment)”; step due date 11/5/2025; comments “8/13/2025: Per OIP, not an OIP matter. See enclosed email. WP reassigned to FBI.” and “8/13/2025: Per OLA [redacted], signature level changed to COMP RESPONSE. FBI should draft proposed response on component letterhead for OLA & Senior Leadership review and concurrence prior to dispatch.” Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00172481 p.1. ↩

  31. FBI Office of Congressional Affairs email, August 13, 2019, forwarding “Congressional Correspondence: Rep. Nydia Velazquez (NY-07)” with the attachment “Velazquez Letter to BOP and FBI on MCC Epstein.pdf” and the note “TRIM entry.” The enclosed letter of the same date is addressed to the Inspector General and the Director of the FBI. Page 1 read at the image; the enclosed letter at pp.2-3 read from the text layer. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175120 pp.1-3. ↩ ↩2

  32. Senator Ben Sasse to Attorney General William P. Barr, February 21, 2020: “I write to you today in regards to Jeffrey Epstein, the wealthy financier who ran an international child sex trafficking ring and was found dead by apparent suicide while in federal custody in August.” Read at the image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00175139 p.2. ↩

Backlinks