COURT DOCUMENTS

• Document Type: FOIA
• Collection: FOIA Collection
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 0005369960
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 202
• Document Creation Date: June 23, 2015
• Document Release Date: September 29, 2010
• Case Number: F-2010-00666
• Publication Date: February 27, 2009

APPROVED FOR RELEASED
DATE: 18-Aug-2010
 Case 1:08-cv-00708-JR Document 5 Filed 07/14/2008 Page 1 of 16
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JAMES MADISON PROJECT,
Plaintiff, )
)
CENTRAL, INTELLIGENCE AGENCY,
Defendant.
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS OR ALTERNATIVELY
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Defendant, the Central Intelligence Agency ("CIA"), through its undersigned attorneys,
hereby respectfully moves the Court, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(I) and 12(b)(6), to dismiss
the complaint herein on the basis that the Court lacks jurisdiction and Plaintiff has failed to state
a claim on which relief can be granted. Alternatively, Defendant moves, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.
P. 56, for summary judgment on the grounds that no genuine issue of material fact exists and that
therefore, Defendant CIA is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. In support of this motion,
the Court is respectfully referred to the accompanying Memorandum of Points and Authorities
in Support, Statement of Material Facts To Which There Is No Genuine Issue, and Declaration of
Delores M. Nelson attached hereto. A proposed Order is attached.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/
JEFFREY A. TAYLOR, D.C. BAR # 498610
United States Attorney
RUDOLPII CONTRERAS, D.C. BAR # 434122
Assistant United States Attorney
 Case 1:08-cv-00708-JR Document 5 Filed 07/14/2008 Page 2 of 16
JUDITH A. KIDWELL
Assistant United States Attorney
555 Fourth Street, N.W.- Civil Divisio
Room E4905
Washington, D.C. 20530
[phone]
 Case 1:08-cv-00708-JR Document 5 Filed 07/14/2008 Page 3 of 16
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, )
Defendant.
)
STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AS TO
WHICH THERE IS NO GENUINE ISSUE
Pursuant to LCvR 7(h), Defendant, Central Intelligence Agency ("CIA"), hereby submits
the following statement, which is supported by the Declaration of Delores M. Nelson, Chief of
the Public Information Programs Division, Information Review and Release Group, Information
Management Services, Office of the Chief Information Officer ("Nelson Decl.").
1. By letter dated October 18, 2007, Plaintiff submitted a FOIA request to the CIA for fl-
following records:
copies of all internal Central Intelligence Agency ("CIA"),
documents pertaining to discussions concerning the decision
to initiate an internal review of the operations of the CIA's Inspector General
("IG"), John Helgerson, and of the IG's Office as a whole.
Nelson Dccl. ? 15, Exhibit A.
2. By letter dated November 5, 2007, the CIA acknowledged Plaintiff's request and
assigned it reference number F-2008-00103. Nelson Decl. ? 16, Exhibit B. Additionally, the
CIA granted Plaintiff's request for a fee waiver, but denied Plaintiff's request for expedited
processing. Id.
 Case 1:08-cv-00708-JR Document 5 Filed 07/14/2008 Page 4 of 16
3. By letter dated March 3, 2008, the CIA informed Plaintiffs counsel that Plaintiff s
request was still being processed, and that the CIA was unable to give Plaintiff a definite date for
completion as had been discussed with Plaintiffs counsel by telephone on February 21, 2008.
Nelson Deel. ? 17, Exhibit C.
4. On April 21, 2008, Plaintiff filed the complaint herein. See Docket No. 1.
5. In early July 2008, in accordance with its procedures, the CIA concluded its processing
of Plaintiffs request. Nelson Decl. ? 19. The CIA conducted diligent searches of relevant
systems of records that were reasonably calculated to discover any records concerning the
decision to initiate an internal review of the operations of the CIA's Inspector General. Id.
6. The CIA's search for records responsive to Plaintiffs request included the Director of
Central Intelligence Agency ("DCIA") area, which includes the records systems of the DCIA
Action Center, the independent offices of the Office of Inspector General ("OIG"), the Office of
General Counsel, and the Office of Public Affairs. Nelson Decl. ? 19. These CIA components
used a variety of search terms reasonably calculated to locate information responsive to
Plaintiffs FOIA request, including the following terms: "internal review of operations," "CIA's
Inspector General," "John L. Helgerson," "OIG," "Office of Inspector General," ""OIG internal
review," and "Deitz review." Id.
7. The CIA's reasonable and diligent searches failed to locate any records concerning the
decision to initiate an internal review of the operations of the CIA's Inspector General and thus,
failed to locate any records responsive to Plaintiff's FOIA request. Nelson Decl. 1[ 19.
 S. By letter dated July 11, 2008, the CIA informed Plaintiff's counsel that the CIA was
unable to locate any records responsive to Plaintiffs FOIA request. Nelson Decl. ? 19, Exhibit
D.
JEFFREY A. TAYLOR, D.C. BAR # 498610
United States Attorney
RUDOLPH CONTRERAS, D.C. BAR # 434122
Assistant United States Attorney
JUDITH A. KIDWELL
Assistant United States Attorney
555 Fourth Street, N.W.- Civil Division
Room E4905
Washington, D.C. 20530
[phone]
 Case 1:08-cv-00708-JR Document 5 Filed 07/14/2008 Page 6 of 16
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
JAMES MADISON PROJECT, )
Plaintiff, )
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, )
Defendant, )
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS
OR ALTERNATIVELY MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Defendant, Central Intelligence Agency ("CIA"), through undersigned counsel,
respectfully submits this memorandum of points and authorities in support of its motion to
dismiss or alternatively, motion for summary judgment.
I, INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff brought this action pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"), 5
U.S.C. ? 552, challenging Defendant's failure to timely process and respond to its FOIA request
for "copies of all internal CIA documents pertaining to the discussions concerning the decision to
initiate an internal review of the operations of Mr. Helgerson, and of the OIG as a whole."
Complaint ("Comps.") ?? 15-19. The declaration of Delores M. Nelson demonstrates that the
CIA conducted a diligent search of its records systems reasonably calculated to discover records
responsive to Plaintiff's FOIA request. However, the CIA found no records responsive to
Plaintiff's request.
 11. PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff filed this action on April 21, 2008, seeking access to records pertaining to
discussions concerning the decision to initiate an internal review of the operations of the CIA's
Inspector General ("1G"), John Helgerson, and of the IG's Office as a whole. Compl. ?? 15-19.
By letter dated October 18, 2007, Plaintiff had submitted a FOIA request to the CIA for copies of
all internal CIA documents pertaining to discussions about this decision. Nelson Decl. ? 15,
Exhibit A.
By letter dated November 5, 2007, the CIA acknowledged Plaintiff's request and assigned
it reference number F-2008-00103. Nelson Decl. ? 16, Exhibit B. Additionally, the CIA granted
Plaintiffs request for a fee waiver, but denied Plaintiff's request for expedited processing. Id.
By letter dated March 3, 2008, the CIA informed Plaintiff's counsel that Plaintiffs request was
still being processed, but that the CIA was unable to give Plaintiff a definite date for completion
as had been discussed with Plaintiffs counsel by telephone on February 21, 2008. Nelson Decl.
? 17, Exhibit C.
In response to Plaintiffs FOIA request, the CIA conducted diligent searches of relevant
systems of records that were reasonably calculated to discover any records concerning the
decision to initiate an internal review of the operations of the CIA's Inspector General. Nelson
Decl. 1 119. The CIA's search for records responsive to Plaintiffs request included a number of
records systems and the use of a variety of search terms reasonably calculated to locate
information responsive to Plaintiffs FOIA request. Id.
In early July 2008, in accordance with its procedures, the CIA concluded its processing of
Plaintiff's request. Nelson Decl. ? 19. The CIA's searches failed to locate any records
 Case 1:08-cv-00708-JR Document 5 Filed 07/14(2008 Page 8 of 16
responsive to Plaintiffs FOIA request. Nelson Decl. 1 119. By letter dated July 11, 2008, the
CIA informed Plaintiffs counsel that the CIA had been unable to locate any records responsive
to Plaintiffs FOIA request. Nelson Decl. ? 19, Exhibit D.
III. LEGAL STANDARDS OF REVIEW
A. Motion to Dismiss Under Rule 12b}(l)
A motion under I2(b)(1) "presents a threshold challenge to the court's jurisdiction."
House v. Sessions, 835 F.2d 902, 906 (D.C. Cir. 1987). "In reviewing a motion to dismiss for
lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Fed. R. Civ. P. l2(b)(1). the court must accept the
complaint's well-pled factual allegations as true and draw all reasonable inferences in the
plaintiffs favor." Thompson v. Capitol Police Bd., 120 F. Supp. 2d. 78, 81 (D.D.C. 2000)
(citations omitted). "The court is not required, however, to accept inferences unsupported by the
facts alleged or legal conclusions that are cast as factual allegations." Rann v. Chao, Dept. of
Labor, 154 F. Supp. 2d 61, 64 (D.D.C. 2001) (citations omitted), affirmed, 346 Rid 192 (D.C.
Cir. 2003), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 809 (2004). In addition, "[o]n a motion to dismiss pursuant to
Rule 12(b)(I), the plaintiff bears the burden of persuasion to establish subject-matterjurisdiction
by a preponderance of the evidence." Thompson, 120 F. Supp. 2d at 81.
A court may resolve a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Fed.
R. Civ, P. 12(b)(1) in two ways. First, the court may determine the motion based solely on the
complaint. Herbert v. National Academy of Science, 974 F.2d 192, 197 (D.C. Cir. 1992).
Alternatively, to determine the existence of jurisdiction, a court may look beyond the allegations
of the complaint, consider affidavits and other extrinsic information, and ultimately weigh the
conflicting evidence. Id.
 Case 1:08-cv-00708-JR Document 5 Filed 07/14/2008 Page 9 of 16
B. Motion to Dismiss Under Rule 12(b)(6)
On a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), the Court will dismiss a claim if a plaintiffs complaint fails
to plead "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Bell Atlantic Corp.
v. Twombly, U.S. , 127 S.Ct. 1955. 1974 (2007) (clarifying the standard from Conley v.
Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957)); see also Aktieselskabet v. Fame Jeans, Inc.,--F.3d--, 2008
WL 1932768 (D.C. Cir. Apr. 29, 2008); In re Sealed Case, 494 F3d 139, 145 (D.C. Cir. 2007)
(citing Twombly). Hence, the focus is on the language in the complaint, and whether that
language sets forth sufficient factual allegations to support a plaintiffs claims for relief.
The Court must construe the factual allegations in the complaint in light most favorable
to Plaintiff and must grant Plaintiff the benefit of all inferences that can be derived from the facts
as they are alleged in the complaint. Barr v. Clinton, 370 F.3d 1196, 1199 (D.C. Cir. 2004)
(citing Kowal v. MCI Comme'ns Corp., 16 F.3d 1271, 1276 (D.C. Cir. 1994)). However, the
Court need not accept any inferences or conclusory allegations that are unsupported by the facts
pleaded in the complaint. Kowal, 16 F.3d at 1276. Moreover, the Court need not "accept legal
conclusions cast in the form of factual allegations." Id.
C. Motion for Summary Judgment Under Rule 56
Summary judgment is appropriate when "the pleadings, the discovery and disclosure
materials on file. and any affidavits show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and
that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). A "genuine
issue" is one whose resolution could establish an element of a claim or defense and, therefore,
affect the outcome of the action. Celotcv Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986). To
 determine which facts are material, the Court must look to the substantive law on which each
claim rests. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.. 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). In determining whether
there exists a genuine issue of material fact sufficient to preclude summary judgment, the Court
must regard the non-movant's statements as true and accept all evidence and make all inferences
in the non-movant's favor. Id., at 255. A non-moving party, however, must establish more than
the "mere existence of a scintilla of evidence" in support of his position. Id. at 252. By pointing
to the absence of evidence proffered by the non-moving party, a moving party may succeed on
summary judgment. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. at 322. "If the evidence is merely
colorable, or is not significantly probative, summary judgment may be granted." Anderson v.
Liberty Lobby, Inc., at 249-250. The non-movant cannot manufacture genuine issues of material
fact with "some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts." Matsushita Elec. Indus. Radio
Carp., 475 U.S. 574, 586 (1986).
D. Summary Judgment In FOIA Cases
For purposes of summary judgment, an agency's decision to withhold information from a
FOIA requester is subject to de novo review by the Courts. Hayden v. National Security Agency
Cent. Sec. Serv., 608 F.2d 1381, 1384 (D.C. Cir, 1979), cert. denied, 446 U.S. 937 (1980). In a
FOIA suit, an agency is entitled to summary judgment once it demonstrates that no material facts
are in dispute and that each document that falls within the class requested either has been
produced, is unidentifiable, or is exempt from disclosure. Students Against Genocide v. Dept. of
State, 257 F.3d 828, 833 (D.C. Cir. 2001); Weisberg v. U.S. Dept. ofJustice, 627 F.2d 365, 368
(D.C. Cir. 1980).
Summary judgment may be granted to an agency in a FOIA case solely on the basis of
 Case 1:08-cv-00708-JR Document 5 Filed 07/14/2008 Page 11 of 16
agency affidavits or declarations if the "affidavits For declarations] are `relatively detailed, non-
conclusory, and not impugned by evidence ... of had faith on the part of the agency. "' McGhee
v. Central Intelligence Agency, 697 F.2d 1095, 1 102 (D.C. Cir. 1983). See also Military Audit
Project v. Casey, 656 F.2d 724, 738 (D.C. Cir. 1981); Hayden v. National Security Agency Centt
Sec. Serv., 608 F.2d at 1387.
ARGUMENT
IV. THE CIA CONDUCTED REASONABLE AND DILIGENT SEARCHES
A. Lgga1 Standard
In responding to a FOIA request, an agency is under a duty to conduct a reasonable search
for responsive records. Oglesby v. US. Dept. of Army, 920 F.2d 57, 68 (D.C. Cir. 1990);
Weisberg v. U.S. Dept. of Justice, 705 F.2d 1344, 1352 (D.C. Cir. 1983). This "reasonableness"
standard focuses on the method of the search, not its results, so that a search is not unreasonable
simply because it fails to produce relevant material, Id. at 777 n.4. An agency is not required to
search every record system, but need only search those systems in which it believes responsive
records are likely to be located. Oglesbv, 920 F.2d at 68. Simply stated, the adequacy of the
search is "dependent upon the circumstances of the case." Truitt v. Dept. of State, 897 F.2d 540,
542 (D.C. Cir. 1990).
The search standards under FOIA do not place upon the agency a requirement that it
prove that all responsive documents have been located. Nation Magazine v. U.S. Customs Serv.,
71 F.3d 885, 892 n.7 (D.C. Cir. 1995). It has been held that" `the search need only be
reasonable; it does not have to be exhaustive.' "Miller v. Dept. ofState. 779 F.2d 1378, 1383
(8th Cir. 1985) (citing National Cable Television Association v. FCC, 479 F.2d 183, 186 (D.C.
 Case 1;08-cv-00708-JR Document 5 Filed 07/14/2008 Page 12 of 16
Cir. 1973). Even when a requested document indisputably exists or once existed, summary
judgment will not be defeated by an unsuccessful search for the document so long as the search
was diligent. Nation Magazine, 71 F.3d at 892 n.7.
The burden rests with the agency to establish that it has "made a good faith effort to
conduct a search for the requested records, using methods which can be reasonably expected to
produce the information requested." Oglesby, 920 F.2d at 68; see SafeCard Servs. A). S&C, 926
F.2d 1197, 1201 (D.C. Cir. 1991). "An agency may prove the reasonableness of its search
through affidavits of responsible agency officials so long as the affidavits are relatively detailed,
non-conclusory and submitted in good faith. " Miller, 779 F.2d at 1383. Though the "affidavits
submitted by an agency are 'accorded a presumption of good faith,"' Carney v. Dept. ofJustice,
19 F3d 807, 812 (2d Cir. 1994). cert. denied, 513 U.S. 823 (1994) (quoting SafeCard Servs., 926
F.2d at 1200), the burden rests with the agency to demonstrate the adequacy of its search. Once
the agency has met this burden through a showing of convincing evidence, the burden shifts to
the requester to rebut the evidence by a showing of had faith on the part of the agency. Miller,
779 F.2d at 1383. A requester may not rebut agency affidavits with purely speculative
allegations. See Carney, 19 Fad at 813; SafeCard, 926 F.2d at 1200. The fundamental question
is not "whether there might exist any other documents responsive to the request, but rather
whether the search for those documents was adequate." Steinberg v. Dept. of Justice, 23 F.3d
548, 551 (D.C. Cir. 1994) (quoting Weisberg v. Dept. of Justice, 745 F.2d 1476, 1485 (D.C. Cir.
1984)).
 Case 1:08-cv-00708-JR Document 5 Filed 07/14/2008 Page 13 of 15
B. The CIA's Records Systems and Processin of F'?IA i(epnests
Because the CIA is an intelligence agency, it must take measures to protect against the
unauthorized release of classified information. Nelson Deal. ? 7. Thus, the CIA limits employee
Devi. ? S. The CIA implements this policy by decentralizing and compartmentalizing its records
systems. Nelson Deel. 1 18. Obviously, the disadvantage of CIA's "need-to-know" policy is that
the records search and retrieval processes are inefficient and time-consuming, because numerous
records systems must be searched when processing a FOIA request. Nelson Deal. ? 9.
The Information Management Services ("IMS"), is the initial reception point for all FOIA
requests received by the CIA. Nelson Decl. ? 10. Experienced IMS information management
professionals analyze each request and determine which CIA components might reasonably be
expected to possess records responsive to a particular request. Id. The IMS then transmits a
copy of the FOIA request to each relevant component. Id. In the event of a broad FOIA request,
it is common for the IMS to transmit the request to a number of its components. Id. Because of
the decentralization and compartmentalization of the CIA's records systems, each component
devises its own search strategy, which includes identifying which records systems to search and
what search tools, indices, and terms to employ. Id.
Officers must then review any documents located during a search to determine whether
they are responsive to the FOIA request. Nelson Decl. ? 11. After officers identify and remove
any non-responsive documents, Information Review Officers review any remaining documents to
determine whether there is classified information in the documents and which, if any, FOIA
exemptions may apply. Nelson Decl. 1 112. This process is laborious and time-consuming. Id.
 Case 1:08-ev-00708-JR Document 5 Filed 07/14/2008 Page 14 of 16
In the course of reviewing documents for exempt information and segregability, a component
frequently identifies information that it must refer to another CIA component. Id. At the very
least, a component must often coordinate with another CIA component to complete its review of
documents. Nelson Decl. ? 13. After all the components complete their respective reviews of
documents, in order to comply with the law and CIA regulations, IMS professionals incorporate
all of their recommendations regarding any exemptions, segregation, redactions, and release,
resolving any conflicting recommendations. Nelson Deal. ? 14.
C. Details of the CIA's Search for Records Res Aonsive To Plaintif`f's 12 nest
In responding to Plaintiffs FOIA request, the CIA conducted diligent searches of 'relevant
systems of records that were reasonably calculated to discover any records concerning the
decision to initiate an internal review of the operations of the CIA's Inspector General. Nelson
Decl. ? 19. The CIA's search for records responsive to Plaintiffs request included the Director
of Central Intelligence Agency ("DCIA") area, which includes the records systems of the DCIA
Action Center, the independent offices of the Office of Inspector General ("OIG"), the Office of
General Counsel, and the Office of Public Affairs. Nelson Decl, ? 19. These CIA components
used a variety of search teens reasonably calculated to locate information responsive to
Plaintiff's FOIA request, including the following terms: "internal review of operations," "CIA's
Inspector General," "John L. Helgerson," "OIG," "Office of Inspector General," "OIG internal
review," and "Deitz review." Id. However, these diligent searches for records failed to locate
any records responsive to Plaintiffs FOIA request. Nelson Decl. ? 19. In a letter dated July 11,
2008, the CIA advised Plaintiff that no records responsive to its FOIA request had been located,
Id. According, Plaintiff's claims herein should be dismissed.
 Case 1;08-ev-00708-JR Document 5 Filed 07/14/2008 Page 15 of 16
V. CONCLUSION
The CIA conducted a reasonable search and found no records responsive to Plaintiffs
FOIA request. Accordingly, the Court should grant Defendant's motion to dismiss or
alternatively, motion for summary judgment.
JEFFREY A. TAYLOR, D.C. BAR 9 498610
United States Attorney
RUDOLPH CONTRERAS, D.C. BAR # 434122
Assistant United States Attorney
JUDITH A. KIDWELL
Assistant United States Attorney
555 Fourth Street, N.W.- Civil Division
Room E4905
Washington, D.C. 20530
[phone]
 Case 1:08-cv-00708-JR Document 5 Filed 07/14/2008 Page 16 of 16
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JAMES MADISON PROJECT,
)
Plaintiff',
)
V_ Civil Action No.: 08-0708 (JR)
)
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY,
)
Defendant, )
)
ORDER
UPON CONSIDERATION of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss or Alternatively, Motion
for Summary Judgment and attachment and exhibits thereto, Defendant's Memorandum of Points
and Authorities in Support thereof, and Defendant's Statement of Material Facts To Which There
Is No Genuine Issue, any Opposition thereto, any Reply, and the entire record herein, it is this
day of , 2008, hereby
ORDERED that Defendant's Motion To Dismiss is granted.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
 Case 1:08-cv-60708-JR Document 5-2 Filed 07/14/2008 Page
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DECLARATION OF DELORES M. NELSON
INFORZ+LATION AND PRIVACY COORDINATOR
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
I forma-,-tiOt"_ pro
9-
d claration in. sL'.ppor"t. of the t
CIA's nOt:,~Y'~
d'smis OL in the alt err) at ive, CI^'s motion for summary
 Case 1:08-cv-00708-JR Document 5-2 Filed 07/14/2008 Page 2 of 8
e ,: at the
Jew, redactic
cientiy a
aoie
re-ease of dccw.en
_n accordance with the ' acA. and
as
-,es n Jude direr.;.:,
ant to nah7._c requests
made a=ray.
ion. ..,.ke the following
sonal knowledge and the inform
 Case 1:08-cv-00708-JR Document 5-2 Filed 0711412008 Page 3 of 8
This declaration descr
I{ in responding to Plaint-
CIA RECORDS SYSTEMS
information limits the d n:age
that information be m_a;hand.ad.
8. The cis, limits employee access
oyino a "need- twknovr11 policy,
Oyer has
"~uenrraiiz-
other words,
same record,
Policy through
matl
ni.ch provides ti^..
practice is o:vio?.s, one disadva
,~hr
,
ed access
r
nerrociencies created in the records search and
retrieval processes. These in w effic'e _ _es
affect : not
orl.i.y
 Case 1:08-cv-00708-JR Document 5-2 Filed 07(1412008 Page 4 of 8
to a _..~_ request.
IS nn,
it can take a
amount of time to locate information poter_t~_a_l
II. PROCESSING OF FOI.A REQUESTS
requests. Experienced !MS
information ~~ ~vmc,.. taro. stior;a;_
analyze each r and determi
be expected to possess records responsive to a
then transmits a copy of the requ
each re_leva
common for
Because the
compartment
strategy,
snit the real
each component roust
c}: _-'.c' a es ident
components mi
ofessionals in
same
component's dal.
 Case 1:08-cv-00708-JR Document 5-2 Filed 07/14/2008 Page 5 of 8
etermine which
can reasonably
documents, officers must segregate exemm.pt Information to avoi
zhe nadvert - disclosure of cid iTie,^, form-at.on,
information concerning intelligence sources and methods, or
other information _ tected by FO_~- exemptions.
in the course of reviewing documents for exempt.
identifies
recent
ncy orig
rocess
equity in
e -consu:n
to another CIA
 on behalf of the entire CIA and
ation that reflects overall C_A -auit_e
record copy each document is t
oduced and a response is Lrovided to the reques'tor.
III. PLAINTIFF'S FOLK REQUEST
,iocum,enzs pertaining to discussions concerti the decision
to initiate an in,.ternal r'eview of the operations of the
CIA' s I specto" General "IG john e person, and of the.
IG's Office at a ,,hole. .
00103,
process'
2007 letter
conducted from
ackno'wleda
er F-'2000-
17. v letter dated 3 March 20 the
aintiff's counsel that plaintiff's request
 spect.or General
searches
0 CIA co_.o
ted records and
wiled its process
ainti_`fIs requ
above, The
lndeoenden:t . ic
.rarer
These
calculated
_OSA requ.e
records t_.4._
concern
luded the
the Office
 ed pla'?n`.it=f s
eby declare under penalty of perjury that the
Central Intelligence Agency
intt=
spector
 Case 1:08-cv-00788-JR Document 5-3 __ .fled-D-7-lg4f2O08 Page 2 of 6
a, C, 24030
Ol
9
R'V
V2) 4
I
(202) 33 0m56 i 0 fax p_/fwwv .jamesmadf sonprol e z,org
IS October 2007
Scott A. Keck
Central Intelligence Agency
Information and Privacy Coordinator
Washington, D.C. 20505
Re: EOTA Rac nest 1-nornal investilet an of IlYs Office
Dear Mr, Koch:
This is a request on behalf of The lessee Madison Project under the Freedom of
Information Act, 5 U.S.C. ? 552, et sec,. for copies of all internal Central Intelligence
Agency ("CIA" ) documents pertaining to discussions concerning the decision to initiate
al e- 11N Tnhn
_._-
met
f
o
411 W 'I 11 6u ix`.n v. ..ns .q.......?---.-
Helgerson, and of the !1's office as a whole. Enclosed please ind copies of news
articles from The New York Times, Los Angeles Tunes, and USA Today referring to
confirmation by the CIA that Director General Michael Hayden has ordered the internal
review-
We are hereby requesting a waiver of all fees, The ;awes Madison Project is a non-
profit organization under the laws of the ? istrict of Columbia and has the ability to
disseminate information an a wide scale. Stories concerning our activities have received
prominent mention in many publications including, but not limited to, The if tashtngron
Pair, The Washington ?rimes, Sr. Petersburg Taburae, San Diego Union Tribune,
European Stars & Stripes, Christian Science Monitor; US, News and.WorldReport,
Mother Joner and Salon Magazine. Our website, where much of the information receiv
 Case 1.08-cv-60108-JR Document 5-3 Filed 07/14/2008 Page 3 of -6 _
hrrp!/rn wfames a Prior requests submitted by ot= organization have
all received fee waivers.
We are also asking for expedited processing. The 1996 amendments to the Freedom
of Information Act permit expedited processing when a "compelling need" exists, See 5
U.S,C, ? 552 (a)(b)(E)(v'). Srrseifitally, "compelling need?' means "with respect to a
request made by a person primarily engaged irtdisseminating information, urgency to
inform the public concerning actual or alleged Federal, Government activity." [d, at g 552
(a)(6)(E)(v)(ll). The CIA has adopted internal regulations governing expedited
processing and has determined that a "compelling need" is deemed to exist where the
`.`request is made by a person primarily engaged in disseminating information and the
information is relevant to a subject of public urgency concerning an actual or alleged
Federal government activity," Qee32C.F.R. ? 1900.34(c)(2).
no question that the information sought would contribute to the public's
considerations that have formed the basis for discussions on a wide-range of national
security policies. One example was the DOS's disclosure of memoranda that originated
in its Office of Legal Counsel and which formed a critical component of U>S, policies
cop ceneng detention of terrorist suspects. Given the highly publinizednatureofthis
particular controversy end its relation to the activities of the CIA's internal "watchdog,"
an office which has recently produced reports highlighting critical failures by the CIA in
secut?on of the GWOT, detailing the span of arguments considered prior to the
ization of this internal review will clearly contribute to the public's understanding
With respect to expedited processing, as explained above, ;MP has bees: and
continues to be primarily engaged in disseminating information on a wide scale and
clearly falls within the scope of the statute, A "compelling need" exists due to the
tad politicization of a statutorily-designated non-political division within the CIA, but it
also raises the possibility of constituting unlawfiri interference in the activities of the IG
and obstruction of the IC's statutory obligations,
 comply may result in the Ming of aaivil action against your'agency in the United Sea
District Court for the District of Columbia, Flgase note that the denial oA expedited
processing should not interfere with the normal processing of these requests.
lzf you deny all or pan of this request, please cite the specific exemptions you believe
justifies your refusal to release the information or permit the review and notify us of your
appeal procedures available under the law, In excising material, please "black out" rather
than "white out" or "cut out",
Your cooperation in this matter would be appreciated. If you wish to discuss this
request, please do not hesitate to contact meat either [phone] or my law Office at
[phone].
Finally, please have all return correspondence addressed specifically to my attention
to ensure proper delivery.
 Watchdog of .I Is Subject of C.I.A. Inquiry
fys ti IMKMAZ2 'F ands Q SaA-TNii
WASHINGTON. Oct it -The director of the Central lntelligenceA ene e, Can. ]1Iichael v Havder, has
ordered an unusual internal inquiry into the work of the agency's inspector general, whose aggressive
investigations of the C.I.A,'s detention and interrogation programs and other matters have created
resentment among agency operatives.
A small team worldngfor General Hayden isloo`.ting into the conduct of the agency's watchdog utfiice, which
is led by Inspector General John L. Helgerson.Current and former government officials said the review had
caused anxiety and anger in Mr. Helgerson's office and aroused concern on Capitol hall that it posed a
not acted as a fair and
The review ?s pa tic Harty focused on complaints that Mr. Helgerson's off re has
impartial judge of agency operations but instead has begun a crusade against those who have participa:
controversial detention programs.
Any more by the agency's director to exam ine the work of the inspector general would be unusual, if not
unprecedented, and would threaten to undermine the independence of the office, some current and former
officials say.
inspector genera: would
think it's a terrible idea," said Mr. Hitz, who nowteaches at the Universi 'of V'r iniu "Tinder the statute
the inspector generalhas the right to lurestigate the director. How can you do that and have the director
"His only goal into help this office, like any of ice at the agen
Girnigliano, the spokesman.
Several on -,re nt and form er officials interviewe
the sensitivity ottbe inquiry.
 date deputy director, is another member of
Reached by phone Thursday, both M . Helgerson and Mr. Dietz declined to comment,
In his role as the agency's inspector general since 2002, Mr. Helder son has investigated some of the most
ocetroversidi pograr a& the C LA_ has begun dace the Sept. n. attacks, including its secret program to detain
Ina terrorist euspects?
Under federal procedures, agency heads who are unhappy with the conduct of their inspectors general have
at least two places To file complaints,. Oils is the Integrity Committee of the President's Council on Integi y
and Efficiency, which oversees all, the inspectors general, The aggrieved agency head
the uclaite House.
Both those routes avoid the awkward situation officials describe at the C,I.k and preserve the independ
of the inspector general,
But one intelliggnce official who supports Geeeral Hoyden's decision to
going outside the agency would "blow things way out of proportion."
al Convention Against Torture.
"renditions" - the practice of seizingsuspects and delivering them to the authorities in other nations,
The inspector general's office also ranlded agency officials when it completed a withering 'report about the
C.r,A`smissteps before theSept, rxattack --areportthatrecoinmended"accountabilityboarde"to consider
the report by the former intelligence director, Cearze T. Tenet e dhis s razor a dcs, say rag many o cials
"took strong exception to its focus, methodology and conclusions."
Some agency officers believe the aggressive investigations by Mr. Helgerson amount to unfair second
guessing of intelligence officers who are often risking thei r lives in the field.
'hese are good people who thought they were doing the right thing,' said one forme
now they are getting best up prettybad and they have to go oat an hire a lawyer,"
 than five years, which have derailed careers and generated steep legal bills for o. eers under senniss
The former agency official called General Hayden's review of the inspector general "a smart rnove."
at. the CJ A- in 2006, General h ayden has taken several steps to soothe anger with
agency's clandestine service, which has beenbufseted in recent years by a string of prolonged investigations
He has brought back two veteran agency operatives, Steven it, Kappes and Michael I. Gulick, both of whorl
well-respected by covert operatives, to become the C r.A's general counsel,
Mr. Rizzo withdrew his nomination to the postiast month in the rids, of intense op
Democrats.
agency's directorate of operations, now known as the National Clandestine Service, which recruits as
and hunts terrorists overseas.
agency we; e ndtural, Conflicts moor, often arise when the inspector general reviews the
"Director Hayden has done a lot of things to convince the operators that he's looking out for them, and
putting the LG backin its piece is part oft . s," said John itadsan; who worked as a CIA, law yer frorn 2002
to 2004 and is now a professor at William Mitchell College of Law,
Mr, Him and other former W.A. officials said tensions between the inspector general and the rest of the
the ag,ency`s executive director hone 2001 to 2404.
Resentment of the inspector general's work has also at times extended
office, whose legaljudgm ent is sometimes second-guessed by after-the-fact loves
ated failed operations like the Bay of Pigs invasion against Cuba in 1961.
3uc that position was viewed as lacking clout and independence, and in 1939, Partly in response to the
Iran-contra affair, Congress created an independent inspector general at the agency, appointed by the
president and reporting to both the director and to Congress.
 G& PRINT T HFS
10t 000`Crt kjcak1j'ty
akereback CIA ?ns rgenerl
WASMNGTON (All -Gglaresaw e"a reaatvalyAloaa"+n? lb ICdpoM%tro Wthe CIAhumrnnli
too 1/01((+0/ of 1010 Heucn Imaptpanon Cenr O Hold F;IEny7+ rscanww rappta tint to. CIA 0
c$tuiroNa.v of Ito inn00=wr um r-I[work
"Tire I totan of,p?tnvsad0010o. if.=,A 161/ woonad, istmu'stnq; Rep' Sthnste F?yu, C.Tsa
AAMn tn,
Thin intCVoALa 010/ eo ttnal that ou 01(0001 Gen.(IC,aol(*eyden fort pfderaO mp ihbAm,S radmtt Info Lib
a}' mNrK N n. ePanoy+a InapociD antral, hobo HNosrw. In ,Melee of no000E oh no ap40Cf5 cnduc~ bolero
ordzha,-fto*0t. 101 arrasdeFinfonroor has cAYdud WIN BWraa At thtapy 00/110/, IndudtryS fomar 0010501
Gacrr,/ Tenet ON afadwa (nwlv?d in the CIA's datonoon of tapc{t0I cunp000n,
Reyes Is alohid w moon Wito CIA IettbooM1 /p 1/17 wsekio ddaz$ the dAndn, The 110004InINt?aloe 001 nRtaohaC be
Tho Inveaeoafx a couctng mNdn, 49 Go;lmt Hit ono! Na CIA fIt tying to maala or. at In aharpont crI b s A, 4 the Only ottO/oiy
Indcp 0000.: voice innldc did acaaitv?epofr y, merlta:a 0070 House aid Swale ihlepig0nw wrun?Reca, raidfrkey,
o coyw COnenWy too
cute IC,aw01100?
Yes No
Nsw you naa IN
dttron llconac FM
mob E71AM1 ayafia/?
Yes -,No
at 19111010.1000 Nat ecnpraeziwtsl a]das how barn htttod,
Ha oonroen hen boon hidtty cigco! W @1e CIA, Ina n+pcrt In Aeg.q, for axampio, he mpntwrd That Tsnat and w,ec ^?ona(I000nh never
drovc#apoga Ct !thpnNw plan to slapokgonn and miccgci pr~d opponentnw to WtOrt to hiacxrx In 114 Ivn.,tp fc Inc COOL II
^TnaCa wiry ho uekml a eo.zaoped dreamwr the Hob Cel0 to to#o a look or the @ttwa 01 tnnpAnar Cannw and, 111040 Ca, eupgc?I Opadibc
iMP' dhhcn0fir danildaraNen by Inc eliot hoot," Glm!al!eno solo,
'he - IOn ov