THIRD DECLARATION OF TERRY N. BUROKER CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY

• Document Type: FOIA
• Collection: FOIA Collection
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 0001306253
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 9
• Document Creation Date: June 23, 2015
• Document Release Date: October 13, 2010
• Case Number: F-2010-00465
• Publication Date: March 31, 2006

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
WESTERN DIVISION
H. RAY LAHR, )
Plaintiff,
v. ) No. CV 03-08023-AHM(RZx)
NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION
SAFETY BOARD, et al.,
Defendants.
THIRD DECLARATION OF TERRY N. BUROKER
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
I,, TERRY N. BUROKER., hereby declare and say:
1. I served as the Information Review Officer
(IRO) for the Directorate of Intelligence (DI) of
the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) from April
2004 until January 2006. I have served in the CIA
for over 30 years, and continue to hold a senior
assignment in the information review and release
field, where I act on behalf of the DI.
APPROVED FOR
RELEASE^ DATE:
17-Sep-2010
 2. My official responsibilities and
authorities as IRO are described in paragraphs 1-3
of my first declaration filed in this case dated
June 20, 2005, which I hereby incorporate by
reference. Also incorporated by reference herein
are my second declaration filed in this case dated
August 5, 2005 and the declaration of Scott A. Koch
of October 1, 2005, also filed in this case.
3. I make this declaration in support of
Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment as to the
CIA. The purpose of this declaration is to
supplement the CIA's earlier submissions and, in so
doing, address the final seven CIA documents' which
were identified as responsive to Plaintiff's FOIA
request. These documents have been in. coordination
1 As stated in the Koch Declaration, "there are seven records in
coordination or the subject of consultation with other agencies," 1 23.
One of these records was subsequently referred to the National Security
Agency (NSA) for review and direct response to the Plaintiff and will
be addressed in a declaration submitted by that agency. See 4 7. In
addition, this declaration addresses seven documents, previously
referred to the NTSB for review and direct response to the requester,
which were subsequently returned.to CIA as "Not NTSB" documents. Six of
these documents are released in full, and one is released in part (see
MORI Doc ID 1305302 in document description index).
 with other federal agencies.2 With the
declarations referred to in paragraph 2 above, this
declaration completes CIA's response to Plaintiff's
FOIA request. I make the following statements
based upon my personal knowledge and upon
information made available to me in my official
capacity.
4. As indicated in note 5 of my June 20,.2005,
declaration, CIA's analytic effort was limited in
scope. At the request of the FBI, the focus of. the
CIA inquiry on TWA Flight 800 was to determine what
the eyewitnesses saw, not what happened to the
aircraft.
5. Relying principally on materials furnished
by the FBI, including "eyewitness reports, radar
tracking data and certain NTSB observations
regarding the cockpit voice recorder and flight
2 A "coordination" occurs when a document contains information from
another agency and the CIA contacts the other agency to obtain guidance
on whether to release or withhold any of that agency's information. A
"referral" occurs when the CIA possesses record(s) that are responsive
to a FOIA request but that originated with another agency. In such a
case the CIA refers the record(s) to the originating agency for it to
review and respond directly to the requester.
 data recorder," CIA analysts concluded that the
eyewitnesses did not see a missile. The eyewitness
sightings of greatest concern--the ones that
originally raised the possibility of a missile--
took place after the aircraft exploded. CIA
analysts concluded that what these eyewitnesses saw
was the Boeing 747 in various stages of crippled
flight. The CIA reported this finding to the FBI
and, for visualization purposes, incorporated it
into a video, which was shown to the public by the
FBI.on November 18, 1997.
6. As explained above and in earlier CIA
declarations, certain of the records responsive to
the Plaintiff's October 3, 2003, request under the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. ? 552,
are records created by federal agencies other than
the CIA. The CIA referred these records to the
originating agencies for their review and direct
response to Plaintiff. Much of the underlying
information was provided to CIA by the FBI, but was
 not originated by the FBI. As a result, multiple
and serial coordinations or referrals to other
agencies were required.
7. One record located by the CIA was
referred to the National Security Agency (NSA) for
its review and direct response to the requester.
This "record" was responsive to that portion of the
request which sought "computer simulation
...programs used by the CIA and/or NTSB" (item 83).
After consulting with NSA on the most efficient way
to effect the transfer, the CIA referred the record
to NSA by identifying the record and referring NSA
to item 83 of Mr. Lahr's request. As stated in the
Declaration of Louis F. Giles filed in this case,
by letter dated November 7, 2005, the.NSA informed
Plaintiff that it had determined that the record
"was exempt from disclosure pursuant to Exemptions
2 and 3 of the FOIA."
8. With respect to CIA records, the CIA
 responded to Plaintiff's FOIA request by releasing
some records in full, denying some in part, and
denying some in full. The CIA based its denials on
FOIA Exemptions (b) (3) , (b) (4) , (b) (5) , (b) (6) , and
(b) (7) (C) . (See the first and second Buroker
Delarations filed in this case.) Attached hereto
as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of five
records released in part to the Plaintiff by letter
dated 20 October 2005 (MORI 1255552-1255556), and
one record (MORI 1305302) released in part by
letter dated 31 March 2006 (Exhibit B). Also,
attached hereto as Exhibit C, are the respective
document index descriptions for these documents and
one document that is denied in full.
9. With respect to the attached. documents,
the CIA has withheld an intelligence method from
two documents (MORI Doc. 125554 and 125556) and the
names of CIA personnel from five documents (MORI
Doc. 1255551, 125553, 125554, 125555 and 125556)
pursuant to FOIA Exemption (b)(3). See Buroker
 Decl. , June 20, 2005, 11 26-32. The names of FBI
special agents and/or eyewitnesses have been
withheld from three documents (MORI Doc. 1255552,
1255554 and 125555) at the request of the FBI,
pursuant to Exemptions (b) (6) and (b) (7) (C) . See
id. at 11 43-47 and ?91 48-52.
10. Certain information in two documents
(MORI Doc. 1255554 and 1305302) has been withheld
under FOIA Exemption 4, which exempts from
disclosure "trade secrets and commercial or
financial information" that would customarily not
be released to the public by the person who
provided it. The withheld information relates to
the flight characteristics and performance of a
Boeing 747, for example, lift coefficient, drag
coefficient and pitching moment coefficient data.
See id. 9[9[ 33-36, and the Declaration of Richard S.
Breuhaus, attached thereto as Exhibit 5, which
describes the proprietary nature of this
 information. The information was voluntarily
provided to CIA and NTSB by the Boeing Corporation.
11. The CIA has withheld one record (MORI
Doc. 1255551) pursuant to FOIA Exemption (b)(5) and
the deliberative process privilege. This record is
a draft letter written by a CIA analyst for the
consideration and signature of his office
management. Unsigned and undated (drafted in March
1998), this document contains subjective evaluation
and individual judgments regarding preliminary
analysis of newly acquired data. Thus, this
document is both predecisional and deliberative.
See Second Buroker Decl., August 15, 2005, 91 6.
 I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that
the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed this ;3/1-J day of March 2006.
Terry N. Buroker
Central Intelligence Agency